MP3 quality

[djkix]

Re: MP3 quality

Can't comment on what to use at the clubs but for me 192 is perfect. 128 and 160, I can hear a difference. 192, I really can't. 320 seems like an overkill and eats up a lot more space on the hard drive.

[demonAfro]

Re: MP3 quality

Actually, not so long ago I'd transcode to 64 kbps to fit more on to portable audio devices. Can barely tell any difference with all the background noise. I think anything above 160 with standard ipod ear buds is massive overkill.

[res0nat0r]

Re: MP3 quality

^what? no diff? no way.

This is from the lame encoder help, some approximate kbps to sound sources:

A few aliases are available for ABR mode:
phone => 16kbps/mono        phon+/lw/mw-eu/sw => 24kbps/mono
mw-us => 40kbps/mono        voice => 56kbps/mono
fm/radio/tape => 112kbps    hifi => 160kbps
cd => 192kbps               studio => 256kbps

But I do agree with the earbuds, those things suck. You need better headphones than that for any decent sound quality.

[Kat]

Re: MP3 quality

Actually, not so long ago I'd transcode to 64 kbps to fit more on to portable audio devices. Can barely tell any difference with all the background noise. I think anything above 160 with standard ipod ear buds is massive overkill.

64 AAC yes, MP3 no! standard ipod earbuds can easily handle much more than 160, 1411 wav sounds like a symphony

[Micko]

Re: MP3 quality

It's all the little nuances within the music that really complete it.

mp3s rob music of that.

A good set of speakers or earphones can only do so much...

[demonAfro]

Re: MP3 quality

64 AAC yes, MP3 no! standard ipod earbuds can easily handle much more than 160, 1411 wav sounds like a symphony

A symphony on a bus, or a tube, or a crowded street? Even any of the noise isolating canalphones that I've tried have a little trouble with the tube sometime.

But Yah, I was playing devil's advocate a little, as lower bitrates tend to go into vorbis or aac. My mp3 player was quite limited capacity and only for commute/sport so it was quantity over quality. Of course in a quiet room with halfway decent listening apparatus it is really easy to tell the difference up to about 192 kbps with mp3. And sometimes the difference between codecs like aac and mp3 is stunning, especially just a bit lower.

As for .wav, since there is no way of properly tagging them, anything losless gets flac'd up straight away, but that tends to only be downloaded stuff. The only lossless copy that I've made is for 5.1 materials

Anyways, anyone up for some double blind listening tests? Would be interesting to see if any of you can actually tell the difference

[Jenks]

Re: MP3 quality

hard drives are monsters these days. 320 or eat a dick imo.

[floridaorange]

Re: MP3 quality

[Micko]

Re: MP3 quality

[clintlove]

Re: MP3 quality

320 mp3 / wav or bust

[pdowney]

Re: MP3 quality

Anyways, anyone up for some double blind listening tests? Would be interesting to see if any of you can actually tell the difference

I'm on the snooty side of audio quality. Of course, I also failed this test to identify the difference between a 128 or 320 mp3:

http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/mp3-sound-quality-test-128-320/

[Haziel]

Re: MP3 quality

Great thread

Now a curious thing here is ,that a lot of fucking kick ass producers like to use an analog sound ( jamie jones , lee foss , varoslav , shonky , dyed soundoroum , shaun reeves , ewan pearson etc ) that will not make much of a diference if you listen to something on 320 or 192 .

Still though vynil has some great sound elements that digital cannot reproduce .

long live Vynil

[DIDI]

Re: MP3 quality

I think there have been enormous compromises made in music quality over quite a few years for the sake of convenience. The joy of listening to music on high quality music systems has been sacrificed for ipod docks!! We have become used to lesser quality. I was at a friends place the other day and he has an absolute kiss ass system. It was so good. I miss it

The way the music is recorded is incredibly important. It makes lower bit rates at least listen able. But a well recorded piece of music will always sound better in a higher bit rate. If I buy tracks I always buy then in wav.

[feather]

Re: MP3 quality

192 minimum, or VBR, or 320. 128 to 192 to 320 are jumps in sound quality. 128 is useless, 192 is serviceable when music is in the background such as at work or on the move, 320 for auragasm. I have some music on AAC and Flac, but I don't really bother with the distinction between 320, AAC, or Flac.