MP3 quality

[res0nat0r]

Re: MP3 quality

192 was ok back in the day when mp3's first came out and we were still on modem connections and were worried about space and it took 10 minutes to download an mp3.

I have almost 6TB of storage in my server right now and have a 2MB/second download to my house, so space/time is no longer an issue. 320k CBR mp3's are what I'd go with.

Also FLAC is awesome and has some support in non-apple based mp3 players too. Flac is 100% lossless and can sometimes save you a suprising amount of space without any quality loss. WAV is also lossless, but without any compression type algorithms run on it like FLAC. I dont know much about AAC etc since I stay away from that apple stuff.

[Micko]

Re: MP3 quality

320k CBR mp3's are what I'd go with.

Ideally

[simonr]

Re: MP3 quality

Sometimes it depends on the source and how things are recorded. Even 128 kbs can be tolerable when it's the quality of e.g. Hernan's Yellow set ... or fustrating - Sasha's 2004 Renaissance @ Pacha (great set, terrible stream-rip).

I'd prefer 320/m4A ... some things even on flac or wav - but the latter two aren't realistic.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re: MP3 quality

192 for sets is perfect.

320 for tracks being used to dj in a club.

For tracks used to dj in club...Wav > 320mp3 though...

Pretty much this..

btw your avatar is so funny

[lilsensa]

Re: MP3 quality

^^

[Steve Graham]

Re: MP3 quality

the bitrate really is not the most important thing.. something recorded as a .wav or 320 can sound like complete shit

garbage in = garbage out

[res0nat0r]

Re: MP3 quality

^well duh

[Steve Graham]

Re: MP3 quality

right, so this thread is pointless

you can master a 128 recording and have it sound better than a wave of a shit recording.. so whats the point?

[thebanned1]

Re: MP3 quality

right, so this thread is pointless

you can master a 128 recording and have it sound better than a wave of a shit recording.. so whats the point?

not really m8, by mastering a 128 u will only push up all the "noise" created when creating a 128 bit mp3. mastering any kind of mp3 thats not 320 is almost pointless

[bobjuice]

Re: MP3 quality

digital anything is a pretty shitty compromise imo no matter what numbers you label it with.

The invention of the cd came along with an enormous myth that it sounded better than what we had before and most of the world bought into it.

Digital audio is very convenient, nothing more

[Steve Graham]

Re: MP3 quality

^^^^ werd!

[thebanned1]

Re: MP3 quality

digital anything is a pretty shitty compromise imo no matter what numbers you label it with.

The invention of the cd came along with an enormous myth that it sounded better than what we had before and most of the world bought into it.

Digital audio is very convenient, nothing more

not this again lol

digital has many advantages as does analogue, u really have to weigh/catagorise and compare what those advantages are

[i!!ustrious]

Re: MP3 quality

digital anything is a pretty shitty compromise imo no matter what numbers you label it with.

The invention of the cd came along with an enormous myth that it sounded better than what we had before and most of the world bought into it.

Digital audio is very convenient, nothing more

well fucking put bud

see, now that's some great subject for discussion; vinyl sounds better

[Huggie Smiles]

Re: MP3 quality

but cd sounds better than tape!

[Steve Graham]

Re: MP3 quality

hahaha