• fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    12 days ago

    Yes if you’re transcoding a CD to FLAC it’s lossless. That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the process of digitally recording the audio in the first place.

    Nevermind the fact that nobody seems to have paid any attention to the original joke which is that the boomers who can afford high end stuff can’t even hear the difference.

    • uranibaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      You began this by saying

      FLAC still cuts out part of the signal. It’s limited to 20khz.

      Recording from analog to digital is lossy, in the same way as previously described about images. But this has nothing to do with FLAC.

    • Quatlicopatlix@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      12 days ago

      I dont think you understand the difference between a lossless file format/encoding algorithm and “losless” recording/storing of signals. If anyone ever speaks of a lossless encoding algorith theyy mean that avter encoding and decoding the input and output will be the same e.g nithing was lost. Why would the recording have annything to do with the lossyness of the encoding algorithm? If the music was made digitally there would be no loss in any sense since the output of your daw or midi file etc is already digital. Btw in general you just cant record any arbitrary analog signal but you can record a lot of it. You will also never in no media be able to store the exact signal. There is always noise always some variation. Even if you store your signal analog there is only so much variance of the magnetic field in a tape and only so many atoms of height difference in the groove of your vynil. The thought of lossless recording is just dumb if you think about it because you change the signal by measuring it annyway so what even is the “original” signal?