On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 15:59:41 GMT, mcp6453
wrote:

It is sometimes necessary to FTP, email, or mail available for download
compressed audio files. Has anyone done a comparison to determine which
format compresses the most while retaining the highest degree of
quality? It is easy to compress to MP3, which is the de facto standard,
but I would not object to using another format, if better. (The files
are not for public consumption, so I don't care about the receiver
having to have the correct player.) It seems that WMA files are smaller
and may be a good choice. Someone suggested FLAC, but I have never tried
it. OGG seems to be showing up in a lot of converters. I have some
RealAudio files, believe it or not, that are quite small for the
content. RA used to be horrible, but these are the best sounding
download files I've heard. If I convert these RA files to MP3 64K mono,
the MP3s are at least 50% larger than the source RA files.

I am just starting to look into this question for a community radio
station with a hugh CD and record library. The reports that I have
read from other radio stations lead toward OGG as the (current) best
compromise of compression ratio vs. audio quality.

I learned very quickly that it is important to test with a WIDE
variety of source material. If you listen only to pop/rock and spoken
word, mp3 is good. If you include jazz, classical, choral, solo piano,
electronica, folk, whatever, the limitations of mp3 become painfully
audible.

By the way, ATRACS is pretty good (as used in MD recorders), but it is
proprietary to Sony. Remind you of Beta vs. VHS video tapes?

Mike T.