Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Now all my CDs have real and proper homes, rather than being stored in a trunk. And, as I suppose is inevitable, they cry out to be cataloged and ripped.

    Just rip them. Then the directory listings of the CDRs you save the rips to, can serve as a catalog of them all.

    The big question is: OGG or MP3? On the one hand, I think I like OGG's audio quality better -- less shwishy.

    But on the other hand, at least the OGG encoder I have is much slower than an mp3 encoder running at a comparable bitrate. Plus OGG makes me think of Brad Kuhn blathering endlessly about software patents, and that's not what I want to think of as I'm trying to put on some Elgar and relax.

    I also don't like the fact that there's manifest idiocy in the naming system -- the Ogg people want ".ogg" to mean any sort of streaming media file, and insist that an ogg file that contains just that particular audio format that we mere mortals call "Ogg" should really be called "Vorbis" -- which we should know by telepathy or something. Not since the "JFIF" [ic.ac.uk] tsimmis have I ran into such self-defeating jargon scrambling. I'm bitter!

    • Just rip them. Then the directory listings of the CDRs you save the rips to, can serve as a catalog of them all. Not quite adequate, as I'll need to figure out who I'm loaning what out to, or what I can safely give away (3 copies of Spiritchaser [dcdwithin.com]?). The big question is: OGG or MP3? On the one hand, I think I like OGG's audio quality better -- less shwishy