You're right, when you delete some bytes the output from that point forward is pretty much toast.
So, where are your tests?
I tried to find your claim about -c2000 encoded files being completely unreadable, sadly I couldn't
Of course this brings us back to the issue of legal ownership.
Right. And, for instance, in network transfers, it's much more likely to lose some bits (lose a packet) than get those bits replaced by something else. So, I guess (?) that kind of error is more common.
1. LOWER COMPRESSION BUT HIGHER CPU USAGE2. NO COMPRESSION MODE TO SELECTEDIT : But compared with Monkey's Audio, WMA still use more power.WMA = 34.0MB = ~13% CPU UsageMonkey's Audio - High = 33.7MB = ~7% CPU Usage
According to my tests, it should be 1.5 percentage point higher.Second, WMA Lossless is actually pretty fast according to my tests. Could it be they sped up the encoder or changed the preset in the past 8 years?
First, WMA Lossless has, according to the Wiki, compression ratio's surpassing TAK, FLAC and WavPack. This recent comparison shows that's really wrong, and my own comparison tells me the same. I suppose the table states compression ratios associated with the default setting of each encoder, so WMA Lossless should have a ratio higher than FLAC probably. According to my tests, it should be 1.5 percentage point higher.
Vinyl image rips 24/96000[...] Vinyl image and tracks rips 24/192000
Quote from: BECHA on 11 July, 2013, 07:38:18 PMVinyl image rips 24/96000[...] Vinyl image and tracks rips 24/192000... well ... ehm ... I should know better than asking, but ... why?