this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
1605 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
82003 readers
4887 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
128kbps files are roughly 90% compression from raw, so not comparable. I'll admit that I haven't bothered with FLAC much, but in my limited experience it generally is pretty rare to see much above 50-55% compression from raw.
Thing is, storage isn't at a premium anymore, so there's no reason not to use lossless even if you can't hear the difference.
U sure about that?
Old mp3 players used to measure space in megabytes, so yes, I'm sure of that.
Good for you, i had one of those.
Now go check the storage prices now and please define what "premium" is, 'cos last i checked they're being overhyped - not as much as RAM, but on a similar trend.
Anything that requires remuxing multiple times pretty much requires lossless compression. Else it'd become like screenshots of memes because the compression adds up.
That being said, last time I was working with professional audio people, they still preferred WAW as their intermediary format.
Probably because of habit?