From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 13 20:31:58 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C34301065672 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:31:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E800D8FC12 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:31:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2DKVoVg033061; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:31:50 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id n2DKVoT4033058; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:31:50 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 21:31:50 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Roland Smith In-Reply-To: <20090313202226.GA47453@slackbox.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: References: <20090313191520.GA14233@thought.org> <20090313202226.GA47453@slackbox.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Gary Kline , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: best archiver? (for music) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:31:59 -0000 > - The general archivers can compress the wav somewhat without loss, but > none do as well as the dedicated lossless compression program flac. > - Trying to compress mp3, ogg and flac files further is a waste of time. > - If you want smaller files, use lossy compression like mp3 or ogg > vorbis, and pick the lowest quality level that sounds acceptable to you. i did actual hearing blind-tests with 4 people that title themself "audiophile", on their hardware THEY tell have excellent sound output (actually it was really good for me). results lame -h -V 3 - nobody could tell the difference, it gives <200kbps bitrate lame -h -b 192 - as above lame -h -b 128 - they were able to tell difference, but not on all music/songs lame -h -b 96 - i was able to tell the difference on every song, but it wasn't really huge deal.