Subject: Re: MP4
From: Ian Stewart (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Aug 28 2005 - 17:32:43 EDT
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz writes:
> Some pop groups are issuing in FLAC because it's non-destructive
> compression. I have the encoder/player, but have never had occasion to use
> the encoder.
If I remember coding theory correctly, it isn't possible to data-compress a
totally random string of numbers, so I'd have to assume that the size of an
FLAC-compressed file depends on the predictability of the content of the
original. Has anyone tried FLAC? What sort of compression ratios (in
filesize) do you get? How different are the results between, say,
non-repetitive sonic artworks and sample-based pop?
> As storage media become denser and broadband becomes faster, perhaps the
> need for these compression schemes will begin to slip away.
I think you're right, although music corps may try to keep the hi-res audio
'for sale' (and copy-protected) and give away the low-res stuff.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST