[nhancakes]

"Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange...well don't get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren't stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you'll be glad you did."

lol

 

[Menisk]

So true.

 

[Cianyx]

Haha, funnily enough, this appeared in /mu/.

I like this guys response
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aphexeke !!Vf+jmldsYTc My music collection from 4 years ago just turned from 192kbps into MIDI. Shit.

 

[apatN]

Very true. I keep everything in FLAC.

 

[oqvist]

What is the best way to store music then? If CDs really are worse then harddrives for storage. How about bluray?

 

[Emooze]

Punch cards are the best method for storing data over long periods of time with no degradation. I use only the finest cryo-treated tungsten carbide for my cards.

The other cheaper option is converting your lossless files into a binary string and printing it out on cardstock. I find the treble is slightly lacking on normal white paper so I was using bright white until I found out about cards.

 

[SiriuslyCold]

stone tablets would be most resistant to degradation, methinks. as long as you don't chuck them around they'll last thousands of years. oh and don't leave it out in the rain it could lose a little definition at the top end

 

[chadbang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiriuslyCold /img/forum/go_quote.gif stone tablets would be most resistant to degradation

Yeah, but they're hell on my CD player's laser.

 

[krmathis]

He he, nice one!

 

[El_Doug]

Cards and stone tablets sound digital and fake, just like FLAC. I prefer to use archival microfilm, which gives a smooth analog sound

 

[necropimp]

bah i prefer to have my audio hand drawn by monks on long scrolls then i let my eyes scan across the scroll and i hear the music in my head

 

[El_Doug]

Quote:

Originally Posted by necropimp /img/forum/go_quote.gif bah i prefer to have my audio hand drawn by monks on long scrolls then i let my eyes scan across the scroll and i hear the music in my head

psh... snake oil

 

[apatN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by necropimp /img/forum/go_quote.gif bah i prefer to have my audio hand drawn by monks on long scrolls then i let my eyes scan across the scroll and i hear the music in my head

Pictures or it didn't happen.

 

[necropimp]

the monks require that the scrolls stay within their monastery and no photos are allowed

 

[apatN]

Pfft. I call bs on your statements.