What about the size of compression, how does Flac and Windows Media compare? If both are lossless, I'll go with whichever is smallest, period. My pro-FLAC bias is based on the simple fact that it was the first lossless compression I ever saw.
Bruce -- Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. John 1:12 NIV Bruce Toews E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Scott Blanks wrote: > I don't often limit myself to a "me too" message, but Kevin has made nothing > but good points in his post. I too have found that, when talking to people > who prefer flak, more often than not they tend to be anti-microsoft, rather > than for flak for a good reason. Go WMA. > > Scott > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:46 PM > Subject: Re: Windows Media Audio > > > Hi Bruce. > > The obvious advantages are: > WMA is supported by many players and is probably the next most supported > format to MP3 > WMA supports ID3 tags and so is supported by many software music databases > for managing music collections > WMA can be burned directly to audio CD's because most burning software > programs support direct conversion from WMA to CDDA - I'm not aware of any > that will do this for Flak > WMA sounds damn good - there has been some subjective discussion here on the > comparison between MP3 and WMA, some of which seems very anti-Microsoft > based tripe rather than objective considerations and evidence based. The > fact is that MP3 is the oldest encoding technology around and lacks the > recent development that's been put into more modern encoders such as WMA. > It's true that DRM is a driver for music sites to adopt WMA but you can't > sell crap quality music so it would not make sense for the industry to adopt > a technology that wasn't going to provide the best quality for the best file > size. I've personally done much testing over the past 5 to 6 years and have > switched from MP3 to WMA based on the evidence of playback on my computer, > on my portable player and on my Linn hi-fi. It was painful to rip my > collection all over but I can tell you that the difference in quality is > absolutely apparent and that pain has been rewarded. > > Regards. > > Kevin > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce Toews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 4:26 PM > Subject: RE: Windows Media Audio > > > Does WMA Lossless ahve any advantage over FLAC or vice versa? > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists we offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com
