From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0119_01C2B808.7F95D450
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   None.  That is why I asked Adam to provide the information on exactly =
what he compared.

   Low quality is easy.  If you want the smallest size for any format, =
pick the lowest bit rate option.  If you don't then size isn't as =
important to you as other factors.

Rich

  "Randy H"  wrote in message =
news:3e1e1d32{at}w3.nls.net...
  What objective attributes define 'decent quality'?

    "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e1dba9e{at}w3.nls.net...
       Better than what?  Smaller than what?

       If you want better, the original CD would be best followed by WAV =
files and WMA Lossless.  If you want small, low quality anything will = do.

       For decent quality, what are the exact sizes you found when you =
compared equivalent quality WMA, MP3, and ogg?  I've seen random claims =
on sites like slashdot that usually fall back on religion not reality.  =
Can you do better or is this just another example of random noise from =
you.

    Rich

      "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message =
news:3e1dafed{at}w3.nls.net...
      " Since you brought it up twice now I'll ask you about it.  Why =
would you be
      so foolish as to rip albums to ogg? "

      Because I find:

      A) The ripped files sound better when played through my HiFi
      B) The files are smaller for a given quality.

      Both of the above factors are important to me.

      Adam



      "Rich"  wrote in message news:3e1d9f52{at}w3.nls.net...
         Since you brought it up twice now I'll ask you about it.  Why =
would you
      be so foolish as to rip albums to ogg?  I can see why people =
choose MP3 and
      WMA but ripping to ogg makes no sense.  Please be clear and avoid =
propaganda
      and your typical drivel.

      Rich

      "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
      news:3e1d4d1e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
      I can't find anything about ogg....is it not supported or am I =
missing
      something?

      It would be tedious if it doesn't support ogg (given ogg is free) =
as I would
      like to give it a go but about 1/2 my albums are now ripped to =
ogg.

      Adam


------=_NextPart_000_0119_01C2B808.7F95D450
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








  
None.  That is why I =
asked Adam=20
to provide the information on exactly what he =
compared.
 
   Low
quality is easy.  =
If you want=20
the smallest size for any format, pick the lowest bit rate
option.  = If you=20
don't then size isn't as important to you as other factors.
 
Rich
 

  "Randy H" <randy_holcomb{at}attglobal.netmailto:randy_holcomb{at}attglobal.net">randy_holcomb{at}attglobal.net
A>>=20
  wrote in message news:3e1e1d32{at}w3.nls.net...
  What objective attributes define
'decent=20
  quality'?
   
  

    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:3e1dba9e{at}w3.nls.net...
       Better than =
what?  Smaller=20
    than what?
     
       If
you want better, =
the original=20
    CD would be best followed by WAV files and WMA Lossless.  If =
you want=20
    small, low quality anything will do.
     
       For
decent quality, =
what are the=20
    exact sizes you found when you compared equivalent quality WMA, MP3, =
and=20
    ogg?  I've seen random claims on sites like slashdot that =
usually fall=20
    back on religion not reality.  Can you do better or is this =
just=20
    another example of random noise from you.
     
    Rich
     
    
      "Adam Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
= wrote=20
      in message news:3e1dafed{at}w3.nls.net..."
=

      Since you brought it up twice now I'll ask you about it.  Why =
would=20
      you beso foolish as to rip albums to ogg?
"Because I=20
      find:A) The ripped files sound better when played through =
my=20
      HiFiB) The files are smaller for a given
quality.Both =
of the=20
      above factors are important to =
me.Adam"Rich"=20
      <{at}> wrote in message news:3e1d9f52{at}w3.nls.net...&nbs=
p; =20
      Since you brought it up twice now I'll ask you about it.  Why =
would=20
      yoube so foolish as to rip albums to ogg?  I can see why =
people=20
      choose MP3 andWMA but ripping to ogg makes no sense.  =
Please be=20
      clear and avoid propagandaand your typical=20
      drivel.Rich"Adam
Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
= wrote=20
      in messagenews:3e1d4d1e$1{at}w3.nls.net...=
I=20
      can't find anything about ogg....is it not supported or am I=20
      missingsomething?It would be tedious if
it doesn't =
support ogg=20
      (given ogg is free) as I wouldlike to give it a go but about =
1/2 my=20
      albums are now ripped to=20
ogg.Adam

------=_NextPart_000_0119_01C2B808.7F95D450--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4