I'm quite aware that aac is lossie. I've been following compression
technology since early 1997, thanks for the headsup though smile.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dane Trethowan
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 4:35 PM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: audio quality
Whilst they're different compression methods FLAC and Apple Lossless pretty
much amount to the same thing when used, that is to say that when music is
compressed using either of these encoding methods, the end result is
lossless.
AAC/AAC+ is not lossless compression nor is it Apple Lossless compression.
On 14/11/2011, at 5:36 AM, Richard Claypool wrote:
I never knew who made apple flac, so misunderstood the message, thanks for
the knowledge.
-----Original Message----- From: David McLean
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:04 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: audio quality
Apple lossless is ALAC. I've never seen anything encoded with it however.
On Nov 13, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Richard Claypool wrote:
my bad, I thought flac was apple lossless.
-----Original Message----- From: Brent Harding
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:26 PM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: audio quality
Yes, but that could change now that Apple recently made it open source. I
don't know what would make it any better than flac, shn, or any of the
others except if you used an Ipod, now you can generate the files with
other
tools.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Hamit Campos" <[email protected]>
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 1:49 PM
Subject: RE: audio quality
Ah see that's the thing about Apple Losless, If you use it, you have to
play
it either on your Ipod, or Itunes. So If you don't have them, or if you
don't care for them, then what's the point?
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Brent Harding
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 12:42 PM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: audio quality
I heard that Apple made their lossless format open source. I'm not sure
why
they would do that or what makes it better or different than the rest
besides it locked you in when it wasn't open source. I'm not sure if
anyone
made tools yet using it though if one doesn't use Itunes.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Claypool"
<[email protected]>
To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: audio quality
I don't use wma lossless, the bootleggers I deal with use flac, and
it's
not limited to windows.
-----Original Message----- From: Hamit Campos
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 10:27 AM
To: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Subject: RE: audio quality
Yep, PCM 44100 KHZ 16 bit is fine for music, that's what CDs are
anyways.
Even wma lossless would be fine but only WMP can make it. That's why I
wish
Olympus would dump regular old WMA, and get WMA Losless on their
recorders.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sunshine
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 12:24 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: audio quality
in terms of audio quality for file types which is the best for
archiving
music/ or spoken word?
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
[email protected]
