Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : e.Digital Corporation(EDIG) - Embedded Digital Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe Copia who wrote (2573)	3/9/1999 3:51:00 PM
From: chris431	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18366

Just figured I'd quickly post regarding VQF. Some like it, many don't. Alot say it doesn't compare to the quality of MP3, others say it's better. I personally have listened to the same recording with both compressions and prefer MP3. At the same level of quality, the file sizes are in all practicality the same (when you have gigs of space, who cares about a couple 100k....and while portables don't currently have gigs and gigs, wait a few years and they are almost guaranteed to have). I have also compressed songs with both and once again found the quality of MP3 better although if I recall correctly, VQF was faster. You can probably get a VQF program from mp3.com. I forget where I got the one I used but I believe it is the most popular one in use and is made by Yamaha (Yamaha SoundVQ). Chris