From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Mon,  9 Dec 2013 18:18:51 -0500
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <ba085cc1cfce5d38bd2f6bc86a168224@ladd.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAL6pNZ87iAQJGPu-Vv=88-ke1D_8zgDyHVWj2BcJsjO8mum6ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9fbffeffeff29482f4f62d6f1054194a@felloff.net>
	<af2b266465229069f8092a61e1f8ab1c@quintile.net>
	<CAGGHmKG-JVYGXDz0x0EBZYJMRWq_HMd0UP-dkn2AfOi0oStxPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL6pNZ_UKxXAyG7U4Uh6Unq9Yh61yZ=hAQT4DrTV88tOrtvp6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGGHmKFa8YEhBOm51gNe-xDo+u9=h7PmhzqRrgqTpBUh1FNGQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL6pNZ87iAQJGPu-Vv=88-ke1D_8zgDyHVWj2BcJsjO8mum6ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] music storage
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 94e2b0ba-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Mon Dec  9 17:54:11 EST 2013, conor.williams@gmail.com wrote:

> FLAC seems huge (again) compared to Mp3 but I will try the Flac - according
> to:
> http://www.head-fi.org/t/654057/alac-vs-flac
> there is good compression alright...

sure.  but that's not engineering.  engineering is balancing the cost
of a resource vs the benefit.  so we're trading storage against sound
quality.  storage is ~$15/GB, and sound quality is subjective.  so
it's up to the customer to determine where on this continuum the
solution should be.  but it does seem a tad rich to say that an extra
$10 or so of storage is extravagant  (assuming steve's 50% compression.)

- erik