Re: [ARSCLIST] FLAC?

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] FLAC?
From: Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 09:44:47 -0600
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <123301c6f9ea$baae5ad0$0200a8c0@thetick>
List-archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>
List-help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV?body=INFO ARSCLIST>
List-owner: <mailto:ARSCLIST-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-subscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Message-id: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0611010942360.1148@larry.cc.utexas.edu>
References: <123301c6f9ea$baae5ad0$0200a8c0@thetick>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Eric Jacobs wrote:

> On 10/27/2006 David Seubert wrote:
>
> > Off the top of my head I'd say these would be the basic
> > requirements for a lossless compressed format to take off
> > in the audio world and supplant wav as the standard format
> > for archiving:
> > <snip>
> > 3) Files play back on/in *all* standard consumer playback
> > hardware/software (itunes, ipods, real, winamp, etc)
>
> Must an *archival* (not an access) format be supported on
> *consumer* playback hardware/software?

An interesting question...however I think how the general lack of
availability of playback hardware makes a recording a candidate for
reformatting.

Karl

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] FLAC?
  - From: Mike Richter

Prev by Date: [ARSCLIST] Watermarking
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Effect of vibrations on audio tape
Previous by thread: [ARSCLIST] Watermarking
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] FLAC?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] FLAC?

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]