[vorbis] Ogg too good?

[Wilson]

Yes. This is exactly my reasoning. I'm about to pick up a 160GB drive and do
the same.
You can store roughly 320 CDs in FLAC format on a 160GB drive. I have more
than that, but I don't necessarily need them all ripped. Also, having the
FLACs around makes it easy to cut MP3s at specific bitrates when you want to
make files that are compatible with your portable MP3 player, etc.
It would be super-cool if Oggenc could take FLAC files as input, though.
The only real drawback to FLAC is that the tagging is awful.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Walther" <krooger at debian.org>
To: <vorbis at xiph.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:21 AM
Subject: Re: [vorbis] Ogg too good?

I bought a 160G drive, and now I just save everything as flac, and THEN
encode it to ogg.  If I ever want to reencode my stuff, I can go back to
the original flac files, since they are lossless.

This approach costs about $0.70 per CD that can be stored on the disk.
Just about the same cost as a jewel case.  Saves a lot of space though
for cramped quarters where it may not be practical to put up a little CD
rack to hold your collection of 1000 or more CD's.

I'm paranoid that Ogg might get better... I don't want to be stuck with
old ugly sounding ogg's when I could reencode them to be better
sounding...

Jonathan

On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 11:59:17PM -0500, Wilson wrote:
>I'd like to point out that I mostly use q7 out of a deep-seated sense of
>paranoia. q4.99 sounds great to me, but disks are cheap, so I add some
>margin in case my hardware gets better down the road.

<p><p>--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.