Reasons for keeping lossless audio: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 2007-10-19T17:42:13

maybe today, you, with current environment cannot hear the difference between 320kbps mp3 (lossy compressed) and wav (full quality).
- What about tomorrow?
- What about other people than you? (At least as DJ you should probably care about others)
- What about a different environment, e.g. new speakers, headphones ...?
- What about when you make edits and hence have to re-encode two, three or more times?

Instead of mp3 and other quality-reducing lossy compressions, you can use lossless compression to save disk space, thereby keeping the full quality of the original audio data. One lossless audio format is FLAC. Another (having the advantage of being supported by Windows XP without requiring any additional program) is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Audio#Windows_Media_Audio_Lossless.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ** What about other people than you? (At least as DJ you should probably care about others)
 ** What about a different environment, e.g. new speakers, headphones ...?
-** What about when edit and hence have to re-encode two, three or more times?
+** What about when you make edits and hence have to re-encode two, three or more times?
-** What about effects that one cannot hear, but are still there?
 Instead of mp3 and other quality-reducing lossy compressions, you can use [[lossless compression]] to save disk space, thereby keeping the full quality of the original audio data. One lossless audio format is [[FLAC]]. Another (having the advantage of being supported by Windows XP without requiring any additional program) is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Audio#Windows_Media_Audio_Lossless.
 see also: [[reasons for keeping full CD rips]]