The point is that if you care enough to worry about .01% differences,
then you should be using lossless anyway. As time goes on, memory only
gets cheaper, and bandwidth faster, so the arguments for lossy diminish
even further. If you want a lossy format, I'd go with LAME. It's the
best, period.
Well thanks for the opinion that I should rip lossless, I did not feel I
had to launch into a long explanation of why I keep TWO servers one with
lossless for home audio and a second synched with ipod which also serves
as a multiperson server and this has many time more tracks and hence
need to be
ajmitchell;152632 Wrote:
> I have usually ripped CDs using EAC and LAME (latest version available)
> direct -0 VBR or 320kbs CBR.
>
> I have notice itunes has improved its ripping gradually and its is
> possible to get excellent results direct to Apple lossless. However how
> does LAME 320 compa
Why don't you just listen for yourself? Do you really need other people
to tell you which sounds better, when you have the ability to do this
test for yourself? FWIW, just go with lossless, whether it's Apple,
FLAC, WAV, doesn't matter. You'll sleep better knowing that your files
are "bit perfect
