4 ms·
Why can't they just offer FLAC and eliminate CDs altogether?
by induscreep 14y ago
Why can't they just offer FLAC and eliminate CDs altogether?
- rgbrgb 14y agoBecause most people don't want FLAC. It's huge and incompatible with the most popular players for no noticeable benefit to the vast majority of listeners. AIFF or WAV would be much better candidates if we were going down the lossless digital music route because they are more widely compatible (though a 320 kbps mp3 is the most I'll ever need).
- thevdude 14y ago> It's huge ... no noticeable benefit > WAV would be much better
- rgbrgb 14y agoI'm just saying that if we're choosing a lossless audio codec I'd like one supported by Apple. I'll sacrifice storage capacity for being able to listen with iTunes/iPhones. That said... I always choose mp3's for everything that's not a "master copy".
- induscreep 14y agoThey could offer FLAC and MP3 instead of CDs and MP3...
- jdechko 14y agoAgreed, though I'm entrenched in the Apple ecosystem, so I'd prefer ALAC from iTunes. Since I prefer to rip my CD's in ALAC, I would have no need to buy the actual CD. Of course, I suspect that's why the labels have been holding true hi-bitrate files back from the likes of Apple & Amazon.
- dangravell 14y agoRipping to FLAC is the only reason I still purchase CDs. That said, I do transcode to MP3 for portable players, so a cloud player that linked to MP3s from my phone would be useful.