AC 3 to Flac 5.1 or AC3 to HE-AAC 5.1

[guada 2]

Hello to all,

Format AC3 seems to enjoy a future without precedent.
In faithful term of restitution the 5.1 DD excel on the matter.
It appears clear that other audio formats abounds in possibilities.
FLAC a compression without loss is more and more appreciated users and tenors of the music HF.
Whereas He-aac is dissociated gradually and sees itself already promoted has more objectives enticing.

A feeling says to me that Flac is likely to excel in the world of audio 2.0, whereas He-acc in the world of emptied the multicannal.
I undoubtedly make distort road, but I fear extremely that reality is not favorable to the rise of the audio codec without loss.

Flac 5.1, would not have it not a chance to appear among the elitist codec audios of the video?
I would like to believe in it, but penseé to think that it only makes appearing or favourites resigns me to any premature comment.

And impassioned you of beautiful sound, which is your opinion on this interrogation?

[Yong]

My choice will be AC3 to HE-AAC 5.1,
because AC3 is lossy audio codec, lossy to lossless only make the audio file bigger(which make no sense).

[guada 2]

If I your reasoning understands(without anything changed):
Lossy + lossy = lossy and,
Lossy + without loss = X

Which would be for you the value of X?
Your approval is it with marketing or quite simply of a judgement specific to you?

Thank you to clarify.

[Yong]

If u dicided go to AC3 to FLAC,
i'd suggest u keep the AC3 audio file instead.

X is lossy:p
And why i choose HE-AAC?
because odinary ppl can't heard the difference between source and transcoded Real Helix DNA HE-AAC @ 64kb/s;)

[guada 2]

Yong,

It is astonishing, I always thought that "the sound signalling hooters" of Malaysia was containing "lossy". :confused: :p :D

Perhaps that I cheating, but it is possible that I approach reality.:D :D

To soon ;)