In Reply to: New Cans o' Worms..... posted by Todd Krieger on February 12, 2006 at 02:25:23:
Todd,Give it a moment's thought. What's being compressed is not music; it's data. It's certainly true that recording is not lossless. And it's true that conversion to digital (if any) is not lossless. But once it's in digital form, lossless is (as someone else has written) lossless. Whether music has regular patterns is beside the point; it's not music that's being compressed, but data.
But as I wrote elsewhere, there certainly could be failures in the algorithm that recovers the data. So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.
jim
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: New Cans o' Worms..... - Jim Austin 17:03:12 02/13/06 (5)
- 'So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.' - Lynn 17:36:45 02/13/06 (4)
- Re: 'So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.' - Jim Austin 17:58:12 02/13/06 (3)
- Re: 'So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.'..Unlikely - theaudiohobby 05:29:58 02/22/06 (2)
- Re: 'So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.'..Unlikely - Jim Austin 07:27:08 02/22/06 (1)
- Re: 'So in practice it's quite possible that Apple lossless is not truly lossless.'..Unlikely - theaudiohobby 17:25:59 02/22/06 (0)