bluecrab Posted March 14, 2007 Report Share Posted March 14, 2007 http://www.boston.com/business/personaltec...lower_fidelity/Near the end of this article it is said that lossless compressed music is 2-3 years away. How would that work, exactly?I am still happy with various combinations of SP/LP2/LP4! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 14, 2007 Report Share Posted March 14, 2007 * Moved to Off-Topic section Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparda Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 Don't we already have lossless compressed solutions? Take FLAC for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
streaml1ne Posted March 31, 2007 Report Share Posted March 31, 2007 (edited) The article said 'probably three to five years away from widespread use of so-called "loss-less" compression schemes'. Keyword widespread, as in people will wake up and ditch mp3 for flac when storage and bandwith are no longer concerns. Effectively, once portable devices can hold a few hundred gigs or a terabyte, there's no reason to use lossy codecs anymore. As it stands now I have about 550 albums compressed in a mix of flac and monkeys audio and they take up around 177 gig. 250 gig drives are about $70 nowadays, it makes lossless a no-brainer for the desktop. IF, of course, you care about sound quality. I'd venture to say most people from 15-30 nowadays do not. It is all about convenience for those folks, until they get bit by the audiophile bug. We're on the verge, in 3-5 years time we'll easily have 1 terabyte 1.8" drives, and the 1TB PC harddrives of today will cost $70 or less like 250 gig drives do now. Yay for advances in technology. Edited March 31, 2007 by streaml1ne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny mac Posted April 1, 2007 Report Share Posted April 1, 2007 Perhaps in 2 to 3 years there'll be portable players at 150 - 200 gb or so but most people will ot buy one of them & use lossless. Instead, they'll buy high capacity flash players (say 32 gb) & continue using mp3 etc.This is because the flash players will be smaller, lighter & more convenient. And what's portable music about if not convenience? Really high capacity HDD portables will be a vey small niche market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boojum Posted April 7, 2007 Report Share Posted April 7, 2007 Right now LAME 3.97 V2 NEW FAST is nearly as good as uncompressed, and fools most of the people most of the time. The arguement about how bad compressed audio is has come to be almost ridiculous. To wit: a fellow I know had a "golden ears" friend who could distinguish compressed from uncompressed, easily, he claimed. So, my freind played the golden eared fellow ten tracks, all the same music and asked his buddy to choose which was compressed and which was not. The golden ears held up his list proudly at the end of the test only to be told he heard the same 128 Kb file ten times in a row. The listener never again spoke to the tester.Not all folks are that asinine, but on an ABX test very, very few can tell them two apart. ;o)Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.