some of you think i am trashing the FLACs... no... i just don't have anything to play them...
Well... I wonder why didn't anyone created LosslessMP3 (since we have lossyFLAC).
Seriously, did you even take a look at Wavpack Hybrid or OptimFrog Dualstream?
DVD-Players decode mp3 to PCM, but won't decode ISO->WAV->PCM (not LPCM here please!)If a DVD techincally decodes an mp3 to PCM, it might just because it found a "mp3-header".
QuoteSeriously, did you even take a look at Wavpack Hybrid or OptimFrog Dualstream?seriously yes... i took a look at it... but ain't able to play anywhere...
I know that MPC has got not much hardware support (if any) but let's suppose I buy a RockBox supported iPod, then it's a start isn't it?
batagy, Isn't DVD-A incompatible with DVD-V only devices?Isn't most DVD+/-R medium incompatible with DVD-A format?I never seen a DVD-A enabled DVD for purchase.
you guys don't get it...lossless is two much... at least for nowevery lossy codec has its pros and cons.the only contrary about MPC is hardware support, which I remember saying "buying a well-known rockbox supported ipod".but guess what I can even connect the laptop to the stereo...I don't see myself using Vorbis/AAC/MP3 anymore (too many issues)
To anyone who asks if Musepack is still being developed, I have several points to present:1. Have you missed the last 4 encoder releases (3 from last year, 1 from 2004), which fix some quite important issues?2. Have you missed the continuous updates to libmpcdec, the portable Musepack decoder library which has enabled Musepack support in various applications on various platforms?3. Musepack's sound quality/psychoacoutics related code is very advanced and therefore very few people can handle it. The former main developer is busy with other (not audio codec related, but frightningly advanced and demanding) projects.The situation is not much different with other modern audio and video codecs. Pretty much all open source codec projects, including us, are in need of capable developers.4. Personally, I've grown tired of comparisons related to "who has the most development?" The most obvious example is Musepack VS Vorbis. Most people may not even know that the last quality related developments Vorbis has had occured in 2001-2002 (excluding unsupported 3rd party modifications, or hacks). Monty, the main developer, hasn't published anything in that field since then. The focus has been on cleaning up code, fixing bugs, improving speed, etc. There is constant development, and exactly the same applies to Musepack. Code cleanups, bug fixes, optimization, only the last quality related optimizations occured in 2003. But that doesn't stop people from spreading ridiculous statements of "lack of development" or the "death" of the project, which hasn't been more alive in years.5. We know several people (not only Klemm or Buschmann) who are capable of furthering SV7.5 development, but unfortunately everyone we know is busy with another project that takes pretty much all of his time. We've said on various occasions that we'd appreciate any assistance we could get regarding the development of the bitstream, which is the foremost thing on our to-do list.To summarize: The "format," as in, the bitstream, hasn't had changes. Changes are planned but more developers are needed. The encoder will keep being updated as it has been 3 times last year whenever we find an issue. The decoder library is constantly under development and that is a main reason you can see Musepack being supported pretty much anywhere nowadays, be it by Rockbox on iRiver or iPod portable players, TCPMP on mobile phones, numerous players on Windows and Linux/UNIX/BSD systems, and other platforms.
I don't think they are in the same position.
There is much better vorbis awareness
the new ipod classic have yet to be rockbox'd.