Re: Beatles remasters heading to USB

In article <hcsul7$vnm$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This could be a thumb drive using flash technology, or a
small hard drive with a USB cable. I'm inclined to think
the former, as it would be cheaper and the user could
carry it (and lose it) just about anywhere.

They could have used a 16GB (or maybe 8GB) drive and
done it lossless. Ha ha.

At $280, it had better damn sight be lossless.



I think it's 44.1K 24 bit w/loseless compression.

I wonder if it's copy protected?



David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: so how much Dead does anyone have.
    ... I try to do everything lossless these days just because storage space is so much cheaper. ... But the truth of the matter is that in a blind sampling test I am consistently unable to tell the difference between a 320kbs mp3 and lossless, and I have never done a listening test with anyone who could tell the difference on a consistent basis. ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Re: MP3 Question
    ... that with hard drives getting larger and cheaper every year why not just rip everything to lossless. ... That is what I am doinw now. ... And you can then convert the lossless files to other formats as needed ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)