| Author
|
mp3... quality?
|
tom anteater
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
56
Posts :
1637
Posted : Jun 12, 2002 23:14
|
prompted by discussion of burnt cds in parties section...
i know mp3 is a compression standard, so some freq's are dropped to make the file size smaller. my question is, does this actually noticeably effect the sound quality. ie is it the same (more precisely does it 'sound' the same) as you'd get off a normal cd or whatever?
  >>love will tear us apart...<< |
|
|
|
A.Rosengren
Solid Snake
Started Topics :
266
Posts :
4139
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 01:53
|
a normal cd is way more better than a mp3... i mean u can push a cda up tp 98 decibel if u have the power... havent tried mp3 pusshing before thou 
A
|
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 07:50
|
Well as far as i can tell, when you encode 192Kbps and over you can't really tell the difference between it and the original file.
But it's only what my ears could tell.
Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
TiMMY
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
100
Posts :
1480
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 08:06
|
according to r3mix.net, audiophiles cannot hear the difference between a 256kbps to 320kbps, which means the highest quality we should encode to is 256kbps.
I'm pretty sure most ppl can't tell the difference between an orignial CD and a 256kbps MP3 file (havn't tried it myself, because of my shitty headphones).
TiM |
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 08:45
|
320Kbps files? When you encoding in such bitrate you are loosing the whole point of MP3. You are getting quite big file.
It's better to encode the file in AAC, it will have better sound quality and better compression.
Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
Wako Jako
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
26
Posts :
1183
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 09:32
|
192 is good enough for me.
and most ppl wont know the diff too...
SMILE ! and the whole world will smile right back at you ! |
|
|
|
TiMMY
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
100
Posts :
1480
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 09:41
|
I encoded Spiritual Healing (the track) both in in 320K CBR and 320K VBR. The CBR is 21.7MB and the VBR is 10.5MB.
I don't know about AAC
TiM |
|
|
|
DETOX
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
296
Posts :
6194
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 10:06
|
As Space Ninja and Wako said 192 is the most common rate for mp3 and you cant notice any differences with the original cd.
Offcourse an original audio cd is the best quality available
Toodaloo Motherfuckers!!!!! |
|
|
|
talolard
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
64
Posts :
282
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 12:52
|
i read an article about the high bitrate. even thou we cant here above certain frequencys we still "pick them up" and it helps with hearing the "location" of the sound.
Work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.
natanofgaza@yahoo.com |
|
|
|
YAT (vxzp violation)
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
35
Posts :
327
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 15:09
|
i know i heard lots of tracks in 256kbps and in audio cd it still sounds much better!
how can't you notice this? whole phrases of sound are being cut to match the frequency..
btw i think 128, 192, 256, 320, are all compression rates and not frequency.. freq. is
44.1 khz..
anyways listening to cd's is waaaay more fun than listening to mp3 in front of the computer, besides the bitrate
Youth of the Galaxy...
The Time Has Come To Demand Your Freedom!!!
(Doof - Youth of the galaxy, 1996) |
|
|
|
Wako Jako
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
26
Posts :
1183
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 15:17
|
dude you should try my laptop with the sony mdrv700 headphones.
trust me.
its FUN !
SMILE ! and the whole world will smile right back at you ! |
|
|
|
bilbobagginz
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
399
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 17:07
|
hello guyz.
allow me to finish the discussion:
if u use a good mp3 encoder (lame) with
the correct settings (flags, 192+kbps,44.1+khz) on,
and the source was of a high quality, and
the volume is normalized properly before the encoding,
NO HUMAN BEING can differ.
bom.
|
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Jun 13, 2002 21:49
|
About normalizing: It's good when you're encoding your own material or something, but never do it when ripping from a cd!
Use audio extraction, it will rip it exactly the way it is - which is normalized.
Also 160kbps is ok (again, when using lame with the right settings). Tested by me
[ This Message was edited by: Mike A on 2002-06-13 21:50 ] |
|
|
|
Ron Lyner
Ron Lyner
Started Topics :
21
Posts :
685
Posted : Jun 14, 2002 01:13
|
well ofcourse you can hear the difference between 192, 224, 320 and orginal....
well i thought the same as you guys..
till i made a track..
and i encoded it to 128, 192, 320...
well.. 128 sounds very bad, my track was in much much much better quality...
the 192 sounds fine with little quality problems
the 320 sounds great, didn't hear any thing wrong..
but when i heard the WAV file it sounded like something else... its the best..
i think mp3 is great but not like the cd quality...
try to do it with your own tracks.. than you'll sound the difference clearer cause you know how it supposed to hear..
http://www.o-zen.com/art/ranal
-------------------------------------
You wanna dance?!...I know a tune...it´s called stick and CUT!!
V.L |
|
|
|
Foka
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
101
Posted : Jun 14, 2002 20:08
|
My friends everyone told something right but one thing is for sure when you play on a big Sound System you'll ear the difrence try to play one mp3 and after a cd or vice-versa, nad then tell me something.............Much Much difrent specially the eq. the frequencies used on mp3 will never reach wave for example or normal cd.
Mp3 was made for home use, and this is the propose of it, not for professional use.
I mean it's nice to ear at home but nothing more otherwise the labels would start to release stuff on mp3 don't you think?
|
|
|
|
