Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: FLAC vs ISO???

  1. #1
    On OiNK, if you want to upload a perfect copy of a CD, they ban RAR'd ISO's, which to me makes no sense. They make you do a FLAC encode using Exact Audio Copy, under the justification that it makes the smallest files with no loss.

    But I've measured RAR'ing an ISO copy I make from a CD, and it's only about 10% bigger than the FLAC hassle. Even EAC says it makes "just about" perfect copies.

    But an ISO *IS* a perfect copy, isn't it? What is the justification for all this FLAC nonsense and opportunities for CRC errors just for 10%???

  2. Music   -   #2
    hdooga's Avatar ANTI-TRADER BT Rep: +4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    I dont understand your point. You must use FLAC because size is important. You cant RAR your ISO because noone wants to unrar everything they download to use it. RARd ISO being 10% bigger than FLAC has nothing to do with it. And lastly... who in their right mind want their computer music on an iso when they can have it in files which take up smaller space and can be immediatley loaded into player of your choice?

  3. Music   -   #3
    Shadowfire's Avatar catch-22 BT Rep: +19BT Rep +19BT Rep +19BT Rep +19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Many people only want to download individual tracks from some albums. I think that rule is an excellent one.

  4. Music   -   #4
    bunny67's Avatar THE ORIGINAL BUNNY! BT Rep: +35BT Rep +35BT Rep +35BT Rep +35BT Rep +35BT Rep +35BT Rep +35
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    so do i think its excellent as a lot of albums may have some really crap tracks on em


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts