FLAC it is then!

[thebarguest]

Yes, the point about the source is crucial. I think I read
somewhere that radio FM was/is broadcast at a frequency range
equivalent to about 128kbps (or was it 192); obviously therefore,
encoding at rates higher than this is simply a waste of space ....
Also, I heard recently that the soon-to-be-compulsory digital
broadcasts are of a lower audio quality than existing FM - anyone
for anti-progress / devolution ?


--- In peel@yahoogroups.com, Roger Carruthers <roger.carruthers@...> 
wrote:
>
> Fwiw, there is also Apple¹s Lossless encoder that ships with
> QuickTime/iTunes, and which definitely can be played Œon the fly¹, 
ie. you
> don¹t have to decompress it first, but can play it as it is...
>  But I repeat my earlier point, if your source is not a good one 
eg. a good
> FM source onto R2R, DAT or possibly MD*, then you¹ve not much to 
lose by
> using a decent quality lossy encoder (.mp3, .ogg etc.) with which 
you will
> get a much better file size reduction.
> Cheers
> Roger
> 
> *if we¹re really into splitting hairs, MD uses ATRAC compression, 
which is
> lossy, so although it sounds pretty good, it¹s already lost 
something, even
> if you make a digital copy...
> 
> > 
> >                  
> >  
> >   
> >     
> > .
> >     
> >
>