If size is not an issue why bother with losless compression at all?
Anything I feel like archiving as other than a 320KBit/sec mp3
I archive as WAV.
No compression, no decompression, no problems.
And wav can be converted to ANYTHING at will.
follow the K.I.S.S. principle.
Now as a direct answer to the following question seems justified:
Basically the lossless codecs eliminate "empty space"
they work similarly to the way video information is stored in dvd-format.
Instead of storing data for each "frame" they start with a frame that is significantly different from the previous one then the data for each subsequent frame is simply a list of ONLY what changed.
Periodically they start over with a "Fresh" frame worth of data, but that allows an enormous
ammount of compression without actually losing anything.
Lossless audio codecs typically apply a similar method of operation.
It's like looking at a persons face just staring at you on a video screen
how long can the image freeze before you notice?
and how much dat is actually different in the frames when someone blinks?
Do you need to rewrite the data for the parts of the image of their hair,
nose or ears when only their eyelids move?
THAT is how they squeeze 2hours of viedo onto a DVD.
But even with the "lossy codecs" much of what is lost is data that by
definition you could NEVER hear anyway.... high frequency sounds beyond
the perception of most people, other "softer sounds" that are masked by
louder sounds, etc...