David,
You stated "I'm sticking to 320Kbs MP3 which will last much longer than I w=
ill,
and I bet nobody will tell the difference in quality from WAV. MP3 is
so ubiquitous that it is probably the best bet for long term storage
of compressed files."
Re: .wav .flac and .mp3 for archiving - Using .mp3 to archive is a BIG mist=
ake, it's a lossy format - that is, when .wav has been compressed to .mp3, =
a good portion of the information is "thrown away", it should ONLY be used =
for listening. Some sound processing software will not support the .mp3 for=
mat, so when you decode to .wav, you're left with something you didn't have=
before it was compressed, it may SOUND the same to human ears, but make no=
mistake, some information is GONE or IRREVERSIBLY altered . This can be ea=
sily avoided by using a "lossless" format, which will decompress to a 100% =
IDENTICAL copy of the original .wav file used before compression.
Here is a website that explain it in more detail:
http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/audio_formats_comparison_2006.html
Here is one that compares the different lossless formats:
http://http://www.bobulous.org.uk/misc/lossless_audio_2006.html
IMO, .flac is the way to go. .mp3 should ONLY be for listening, NEVER for a=
rchiving.=A0
Tim
|