Flac or ogg 320 or others and why?

[billgoldberg]

I'm starting to switch to flac, for it's sound quality compared to mp3.

I don't use ogg.

[Rainstride]

As the title says....

depends on what you need and how much space you are working with.

if you want to make backups of your original cds, than i would use .flac that way if you need to burn a new copy it will be the same quality. its also great if you have a great sound card and a nice pair of headphones.

if you just want to add your music to your computer for you ipod or something like that, use ogg 320. it will use less space on your computer and music player.

[pwnst*r]

If the file size is not important, flac is the best because it is loseless.

not only that, then you can change to whatever format you wish. all of my music is FLAC for archival purposes and home listening and some compressed for on the go.

[pwnst*r]

dits also great if you have a great sound card and a nice pair of headphones.

..and a headphone amp!

[Dimitriid]

I'd love to use OGG but my cellphone won't read em, my car stereo won't read em, my work computer wont read em without me installing the codec ( which my admin promptly removes every few days anway ) and if I want to share with someone they ask me "what is this ogg thing? Are you trying to give me a virus!?"

MP3 and its terrible, grossly outdated audio quality is a necessary evil.

[kelt65]

FLAC - disk space is cheap anyway. For recordings that are older, say from the 60's and before, OGG 320. I never use mp3 or any other format because the tags are horrible and limited, and since there is no "tag standard" for classical music, one has to make ones own standard, so flexibility in tags is a big issue.

For car listening or whatever I just convert a batch to mp3 on the fly. No problems.

[nothingspecial]

Please don't bump old threads to the top.

Closed.