In Reply to: RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. posted by Archimago on December 7, 2012 at 10:24:46:
MP3 compression at 320 kbps has a marginal benefit, even if it were audibly transparent. There is not a 4 to 1 reduction. It's much closer to a 2 to 1 reduction, considering that the original could have been compressed nearly 50% using lossless compression (e.g. FLAC).
IMO, it's not worthwhile arguing about such a small benefit or even taking the time to conduct experiments. The time and effort spent on these would be better spent purchasing additional storage capacity. Or, better, doing additional research in lossless compression. There are some new algorithms that get to beyond 50% compression losslessly on most material. I forgot the name, but there is discussion on HA.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 12/7/1210:38:33 12/7/12 (4)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Archimago 15:13:01 12/7/12 (1)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 16:26:57 12/7/12 (0)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Old Listener 11:54:24 12/7/12 (1)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 12:02:50 12/7/12 (0)