On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Randy Johnson <<a href="mailto:illuminetics@bendbroadband.com">illuminetics@bendbroadband.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff">
<div><font face="Arial">Just signed up...</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Arial">When it comes to ripping audio CD's from the standard
"Redbook" CDA - 16 bit bytes @ 44.1 kHz format to a computer's drive,
which of the (250+) codec's available provide the least amount of loss? I don't
care about disc space, just the best possible reproduction of the
sound from the original source.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial"></font> </div>
<div><font face="Arial">I use flac frequently, but the "l" in flac is
questionable. After all, how can you compress data to <60% without any loss
at all?</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial"></font> </div><font color="#888888">
<div><font face="Arial">Randy</font></div></font></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Paranoia mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Paranoia@xiph.org">Paranoia@xiph.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia" target="_blank">http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/paranoia</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>If you doubt the compression, you can always uncompress your FLAC files and compare the FLAC WAVs to the original WAV files from the CDs.<br>