From: Matthew P. OReilly <moreilly_at_moreilly.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:20:52 -0500

That's true - I had forgotten about that. (It's been a while since I did
any compressed editing.)

What is it about re-compression that causes quality loss? If something is
compressed, uncompressed, then compressed again, shouldn't it be a function
of the quality of the recompression algorithm whether or not it loses any
quality? If one is going from, say, 16-bit to 24-bit and back to 16-bit
(uncompressed), all you're losing is the 8 least significant bits in the
24->16 conversion, which would be all zeroes anyway from the 16->24 bit
conversion. I know that compression adds more complexity to that mix, but I
don't understand why it necessitates a loss of quality... if I compress the
same uncompressed data twice, shouldn't it be the same as if I compressed,
uncompressed, and compressed again?

Thx
Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se [mailto:owner-rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se]On
Behalf Of Justin Heiner
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:21 AM
To: rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se
Subject: RE: mp3-editor?


I'm not sure about CoolEdit, but GoldWave requires you to uncompress the MP3
into memory before editing it, so you would have to recompress it when you
save it, losing some quality.

I use some cheap software called mp3surgeon. It's under $20 for registration
and does the best job at cutting that I've seen. You can do waveform
previews so you can cut at the correct spot, etc. Very easy to use

-Justin
Received on 2003-03-26