[rolly]

Scenario:
A 320kbps .mp3 file is on the hard drive.

This file is converted to .flac,saving the original .mp3.
There are now two files:
1. 320kbps .mp3(the original source)
2. .flac copy of the 320kbps .mp3

Now if a conversion is wanted to 128kbps .mp3,or 256kbps .mp3,or to .ogg,or to .mp4,whatever have you,does it matter which file you use for the best quality of the new converted file?
The .flac or the 320kbps .mp3?

To rephrase.
If the .flac copy is a lossless copy of the original lossy .mp3,wouldn't the quality of the file still be equal?
I'm not talking about the quality of the format,but rather the quality of the file.
A tricky question because,sure,.flac is certainly a better lossless format than the lossy mp3 format.
But it is still nothing more than a lossless copy of the lossy mp3.

Purpose:
If your only source of the track testsong.mp3 is a 320kbps mp3 file,is it a waste of time to convert to flac first before converting to other formats and bitrates?
Or would the quality of the conversion be the same if you just use the original in the first place,the 320kbps mp3?

[skyforger]

it is whatsoever, because your flac already lost the origin - you got it from mp3 (e.g. from already lossy source). so, flac won't increasy quality at all.

[rolly]

so, flac won't increasy quality at all.

I agree with this 100%.
But just to be sure we are talking about the same thing,it is not the quality of the flac vs. mp3 that I'm asking about.
It is the quality of the converted file produced from either the flac or mp3 in question.

Using your answer,"flac won't increase quality at all",which I fully agree,that is saying that it makes no difference for instance where a .ogg file came from in this case,the original 320mp3 or the flac copy of it.
Same thing would apply to a mp4,a lower bitrate mp3,etc.

This is what I believe myself,and I'm looking for confirmation.

[Ashleyj]

Originally Posted by rolly

I agree with this 100%.
But just to be sure we are talking about the same thing,it is not the quality of the flac vs. mp3 that I'm asking about.
It is the quality of the converted file produced from either the flac or mp3 in question.

Using your answer,"flac won't increase quality at all",which I fully agree,that is saying that it makes no difference for instance where a .ogg file came from in this case,the original 320mp3 or the flac copy of it.
Same thing would apply to a mp4,a lower bitrate mp3,etc.

This is what I believe myself,and I'm looking for confirmation.

I would have thought the end result would be more dependant upon the quality of the conversion software rather than the source given that they should be of equal quality.

[rolly]

rather than the source given that they should be of equal quality

This is what I'm getting at.I agree here as well.
It is someone else who believes that it is better to take from the flac copy,rather than the original mp3.
Claims there will be more data loss from the lossy mp3 than from the lossless flac copy.
But I think it's the same thing.
Both formats have the same quality file,just different formats.

[Ashleyj]

Originally Posted by rolly

This is what I'm getting at.I agree here as well.
It is someone else who believes that it is better to take from the flac copy,rather than the original mp3.
Claims there will be more data loss from the lossy mp3 than from the lossless flac copy.
But I think it's the same thing.
Both formats have the same quality file,just different formats.

I agree that it would probably give better results if the flac file had been taken from an uncompressed source but as it originated from the mp3 file in the first place it can not be any better than that. As skyforger has said the flac file wont increase in quality.

[skyforger]

just to clarify (and to confirm that we're talking about the same): flac won't increase the quality in your scenario

regards,
Max