Re: [MLUG] Apple Lossless Encoding?

["Mark Rages" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On 3/13/06, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Russell Horn wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 08:57 -0600, Mike Miller wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't have an answer, but I would like to know how big those files are.
> >> Lossless encoding seems to imply big files.
> >
> > I've not used Apple's encoding, but the free lossless flac codec can
> > reduce a wave file by 50%. Given the last hard disk I bought was about
> > $40 for 250gigs after rebates, that'll probably hold 1,000 CDs that
> > match the original for quality.
>
> I guess FLAC uses ID3 tags.  Some people really like Monkey's Audio
> lossless compression.  So now I am starting to think about using lossless
> compression to back audio CDs onto DVDRs.  That would be a good permanent
> way of dealing with the problem.  I just need to choose the right format
> -- something future oriented.  Is FLAC the best choice?
>

The lossless codecs all have similar performance, because the entropy
of audio recordings makes it difficult to compress past about 50%. 
(My master's thesis was on audio compression)

I would prefer flac to the others (shorten, monkey, wavezip etc)
because it is free software with a freely published specification. 
Much better for archival use.  Imagine someone trying to play the
audio 50 hears hence.  You could even put a copy of the source tarball
and specification on each DVD.

Regards,
Mark
EMAIL:PROTECTED
--
You think that it is a secret, but it never has been one.
  - fortune cookie

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members