 |
 |
On 5/18/2015 10:44 AM, Tom Fine wrote: > Here's what I don't get about this discussion. Why would someone want to > use FLAC as their primary lossless format rather than WAV, given that > FLAC includes (and features) a data-compression scheme that inherently > puts more data at risk per potentially bad sector in a storage device? > Given the low cost of storage, why not opt for less data at risk per > sector? I repeat what ssomeone said a long time ago in this thread: the big use for FLAC is not storage, but transmission. Not everyone has super-fast Internet service, and for those who don't, FLAC is a godsend. Peace, Paul --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com