Ben Sandee;136179 Wrote: > On 9/14/06, cparker <cparker.2e4wqn1158253801 (AT) no-mx (DOT) > forums.slimdevices.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Because I bought them from mp3 commerical sites and they are LAME > > encoded, so I dont want to have to buy them again! :( > > > I understand -- but I think you are a rarity. How many people these > days > who care about gapless audio are satisfied with a lossy codec? > > Maybe you can convert the mp3 to flac preserving the gapless > information. > It wouldn't surprise me one bit if foobar2000 would do this in a few > mouse-clicks. Have you considered this? > > Ben
Gaps between sequential tracks sound just as bad on a $10 pair of speakers on 64KHz MP3s as they would on an audiophile system with FLACs. The demographic that gets annoyed by gaps is much larger than the demographic that gets annoyed by a 16KHz lowpass filter. I don't think it's fair to assume that those who prefer gapless playback would always use FLACs. While I opted for Vorbis myself, at a bitrate I considered to be transparent, I can see why someone would choose LAME MP3, and even choose a bitrate that was not always transparent. Regardless of the encoding choice, gaps are obvious to untrained listeners on even the lousiest equipment, and some of those folks are going to be annoyed. Transcoding at the server is a great workaround for gapless playback, and I'm very grateful we have it. But true client-side gapless MP3 playback support would be a very good feature--and not just a feature only a few rare cases would take advantage of. -- CatBus ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CatBus's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7461 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=27384 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
