> did you read brian w's explanation of why FLAC appears "dead" ? the > same thing really > applies to cdparanoia, a program now more than 10 years old, maybe > even 15. some things about ripping audio CDs just .... don't change.Oh I don't doubt the basics, red book is red book and bits are identically replicable and re rippable bits. But just as I said, there are always porting, bugs, docs, nits and overall features that can be done around the cores... that aren't being done. And that do limit adoption and suitability to task. Nothing stopping anyone from setting up public git repos and accepting patches, so long as those replicable core standards remain the unalterable and regression tested paramounts of this class of apps. There's also nothing wrong with major format revisions once in a while. Piano roll -> LP -> cassette -> CD, film -> VHS -> DVD -> Blu, NTSC->ATSC. People still make backwards compatible piano players, somewhere, lol :) And certainly lossless forward translators. And let's just be honest for a moment, hardware sellers are in the business of selling hardware. Unless their model is support based, or purely reputation based like say the Technics SL-1200, they must sell new hardware to survive. Therefore, they welcome revisions to the underlying stream once in a while. Planned obsoletion. Guess what? Technics patent expired, they failed to innovate and left the market. Now we have an OEM fill-in led, in example, by perhaps the Stanton ST.150. A new wrapper on the old LP core. Cisco could be considered masters at obsoletion. They sell new hardware to support new features at wire speed. And obsolete their own old children on strict schedules. All while charging ridiculous prices for hardware and support. Sure, the IPv4/6 streams haven't changed a whole lot, but some trappings have and they've been right there to cap on it. As to bandwidth, When you have many terabytes of audio, combined with processing and bandwidth in your use case, FLAC vs. WAV becomes a non-moot discussion. Were that to be also what you were referring to. Anyways, incoherent ramblings aside, this is about porting, bugs, docs, nits and overall features. Not cores.
> Oh I don't doubt the basics, red book is red book and bits are > identically replicable and re rippable bits.I don't see any problem with taking innovation as far as is practical and saying "it's finished, no more updates". I'm not expecting FLAC or cdparanoia to be able to integrate with FaceHugger, or even to be able to query track titles online. If I want to do freedb lookups, I can use abcde (in text mode) or any of the GUI rippers, most of whom use flac and cdparanoia as back-end utilities. I like the idea of software that just works and doesn't need any further refinement. Similar to hardware that's built to last (see below)...> Guess what? Technics patent expired, they failed to innovate and > left the market. Now we have an OEM fill-in led, in example, by > perhaps the Stanton ST.150. A new wrapper on the old LP core.I'm not sure about the patents, but the Technics 1200 and 1210 series turntables are still in production, out of the same factory in Japan. They have definitely not left the market! Stanton and other brands are playing "also ran" with direct drive or belt drive turntables that just aren't as good. Even with new decks easily available, secondhand Technics change hands for high prices because they represent some of the best engineering and quality of manufacture. They are built to last and don't need to be replaced. There have been many rumours about Technics going out of production over the years, and the most recent one was based on an announcement that 2 mid-range models in the 1200/1210 range were ceasing production. These rumours are usually started by someone who has a load of new turntables in stock, and wants a panic in the marketplace to help shift them at a higher price. If you have news that Technics have definitely ceased production, please link to an official website. That has very little to do with FLAC but I wanted to clear it up. -- -Dec. ---
>> Oh I don't doubt the basics, red book is red book and bits are >> identically replicable and re rippable bits. > > I don't see any problem with taking innovation as far as is practical > and saying "it's finished, no more updates".Sure, basics :) Again, I'm meaning in regard to about bugs, docs, porting and nits.> If I want to do freedb lookups, I can use > abcde (in text mode) or any of the GUI rippers, most of whom use flac > and cdparanoia as back-end utilities.Yep, if you can get their TOC tables to agree. cdparanoia, eac and cdda2wav do differ at times with this. It took raw scsi/ata commands to figure out who was right. A minor example of an unfixed fixable.> Technics ... turntables are still in production, out of the same factory > in Japan. They have definitely not left the market! > If you have news that Technics have definitely ceased production, please > link to an official website.Manufacturers routinely decline to state such matters. However, about 1.5 years ago you could get a factory new SL-1200 for $485US. Now one cannot be had for under $825. Furthermore, you may follow this link and attempt to find any major seller with in stock quantities of any model at a sane price. That would be an excercise in futility. Therefore, they've left the market. At least for all of 2010 through today, during which major outlets had no stock and the price consistently rose. SL's are destroyed in their environment every day. Matsushita can produce thousands to a buying public, and competitors exist at various points. So it's the only feasible explanation for the starvation, unofficially official. http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/technics_dj/prod_default_analog.asp> Stanton and other brands are playing "also ran" with direct drive or > belt drive turntables that just aren't as good.Not quite. Only the Stanton ST.150 competes at par. I recently tried both side by side and went ST.150. It is a solid tank. Yes, the rest of their line and other 'dj' brands are flimsy direct or belt. Another note, $wise, 2x new ST.150's = 1 new SL-1200, 2x used SL-1200 = 1x new ST.150. So even slicing it that way, or as longevity spares in good unabused and smoke free shape, the SL-1200 is now largely mooted. I'm ripping about 2000 albums to FLAC, so somewhat on topic :) M97xE, some old Yamaha/Denon/Onkyo pre (haven't decided), and at least an Audigy2 or better spec'd card... if anyone cares. Inexpensive, sufficient quality, happy.