Is there any difference between original sound and converted lossless?

[pcroland]

Hello!
I use Audacity in Xubuntu 14.04 LTS. Audacity can't import a lot of formats, for example: aac, ac3. But it can import .wav. So, is there any difference between these two methods?:
original sound -> import -> edit -> export
original sound -> convert to lossless wav -> edit -> export.
I use ffmpeg so the second method isn't more complicated.
ffmpeg -i source.mkv -c:a copy out.ac3
ffmpeg -i source.mkv -c:a pcm_s16le out.wav

[Guest]

Do you understand what "lossless" really means?

[pcroland]

Yes, but some have said that this method is not good, but i think i get the same quality when i export the sound. Am I right?

[Guest]

Is there any difference between original sound and converted lossless? It's lossless, how could there be any quality difference?

[pcroland]

Ok, I'll import sounds as wav :-)

[tebasuna51]

Audacity can't import a lot of formats, for example: aac, ac3. But it can import .wav.

Maybe 'import' is not a exact word.

Audio editors (Audacity, SoundForge, etc.) work with uncompressed audio like wav files are. Then Audacity 'read' wav files without any operation.

Compressed audio, lossless (Flac, etc.) or lossy (Ac3, Aac, etc.), must be decoded before to be edited. Then Audacity need 'decode' compressed formats, and can use ffmpeg (and others decoders) automatically to 'import' these formats.

Many Audio editors have decoders, inside or by plugins, to decode compressed formats.

So, is there any difference between these two methods?:
original sound -> import -> edit -> export
original sound -> convert to lossless wav -> edit -> export

Is the same. With Audacity you can decode and read some compressed formats using ffmpeg.

But you can decode these formats to wav with others decoders (eac3to, BeHappy, ...) and after read the wav with Audacity.

[pcroland]

Okay :-) But Audacity requires an old ffmpeg build and I don't want to compile it :D So I will use .wav :cool: