For those who listen to music at 128kbps....

[conjur]

EAC + LAME --alt -preset extreme

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: quakefiend420
only with the sound system to back it up...i've noticed most people who don't play with audio equipment much have extremely badly set up eq's...and that probably is most people out there

What you don't understand is, most people do not care about great sounding audio, just that they hear it. 90% of us out there (me included) do not know how to properly adjust eq settings for good audio. Just don't have an ear for it.

 

[imported_KirbsAw]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zip1385
FLAC!

:thumbsup: true CD quality lossless goodness for only about 300 MB per CD.

Plus you have backups of all of your CDs, and can transcode to lossy formats for portables as needed.

CDs, 20 year old audio format, nice. 😉

 

[keeleysam]

AAC > *

 

[stan394]

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: dugweb
re-encoding my 128kbps to 320kbps now.... ill tell you in a minute if i can tell a difference





😉

heh, i almost replied with a "you're a moron comment" until i saw the wink 😛

took me a while to get it.. even with the above comment

 

[Koenigsegg]

You mean AshlEE SimpSon and BritnEY SpearS will sound better? like omg omghi2u

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: KirbsAw

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zip1385
FLAC!

:thumbsup: true CD quality lossless goodness for only about 300 MB per CD.

Plus you have backups of all of your CDs, and can transcode to lossy formats for portables as needed.

CDs, 20 year old audio format, nice. 😉

True, but most of the "new" audio formats that the common person uses are inferior to that 20 year old audio format.

How many people own SACD or DVD-A players? Of those that do (since there are a few DVD players with DVD-A support) how many actually 1) know about it and 2) own media to take advantage of it?

Viper GTS

 

[Jassi]

Originally posted by: Koenigsegg
You mean AshlEE SimpSon and BritnEY SpearS will sound better? like omg omghi2u

lol

 

[imported_KirbsAw]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: KirbsAw

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zip1385
FLAC!

:thumbsup: true CD quality lossless goodness for only about 300 MB per CD.

Plus you have backups of all of your CDs, and can transcode to lossy formats for portables as needed.

CDs, 20 year old audio format, nice. 😉

True, but most of the "new" audio formats that the common person uses are inferior to that 20 year old audio format.

How many people own SACD or DVD-A players? Of those that do (since there are a few DVD players with DVD-A support) how many actually 1) know about it and 2) own media to take advantage of it?

Viper GTS

Yeah I know, i was just pointing out how old CDs are, and the way technology moves its sort of sad that we aren't using something better. I think that is part of the reason everyone hates the recording industry so much, they aren't adapting. When you buy music online you should be getting better than CD quality, not this 128 kb iTunes stuff.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: KirbsAw
Yeah I know, i was just pointing out how old CDs are, and the way technology moves its sort of sad that we aren't using something better. I think that is part of the reason everyone hates the recording industry so much, they aren't adapting. When you buy music online you should be getting better than CD quality, not this 128 kb iTunes stuff.

Audiophiles have been weeping at the rise of MP3s. The industry is more concerned with digital distribution than it is with higher fidelity.

The truth is that most music consumers consider the sound quality of CDs to be good enough and think that MP3s sound "just as good." They don't have the audio equipment necessary to decern between a 128 KBps MP3 and a CD.

SACDs and DVD-As are nice niche products, but I don't think they'll ever go mainstream.

 

[0roo0roo]

well they did sorta care about hi quality sound. they just bungled it with excessive copy protection. they raped both sacd and dvda with copy protection and murdered both formats. they basically spat in the face of anyone that wanted to make music mixes with what they had purchased. u gotta listen to it their way..suffer loss in quality with slow ass analog recording. its punishing paying customers and taking away freedom of use by consumers. they totally missed the boat with the whole computer juke boxes/ipods/music mix burning thing. people like to control how they listen to their music. it was only the lack of technology that held them back in the past. and the music industry tried to erase all the progress with the new formats. bastards. and now every time u spend money on cds you know you are buying 2nd best with the best not being an option at all for silly reasons..

it would have potentially been better if audiophiles had not given any support at all for copy protection ridden high quality audio formats

 

[sharkeeper]

And just where are you getting these files from?

😛

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: dugweb
re-encoding my 128kbps to 320kbps now.... ill tell you in a minute if i can tell a difference





😉

LOL

 

[BW86]

ogg @ 192 is good enough for me 😛

 

[EULA]

Originally posted by: dugweb
re-encoding my 128kbps to 320kbps now.... ill tell you in a minute if i can tell a difference

OMG! I just did it - Audio is awesome! Totally sweet! (unlike splenda!)

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zip1385
FLAC!

:thumbsup: true CD quality lossless goodness for only about 300 MB per CD.

Plus you have backups of all of your CDs, and can transcode to lossy formats for portables as needed.

 

[randumb]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
vbr ~200kbs average or so i doubt most could tell that from 320k or lossless

Nevar! I can hear a pin drop from 100 meters away!

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
vbr ~200kbs average or so i doubt most could tell that from 320k or lossless

that's almost always going to be true, until you're listening to some favorite song and hear an artifact of the lossy compression.

Storage is cheap, for home use why not listen to the music at exactly the same quality as a CD?

 

[n7]

192 kps sounds great to me.

I can't tell the difference with anything higher.

 

[archcommus]

I own a Klipsch ProMedia surround set and things sound great at 128 to me. And I have quite the ear for music, too.

Maybe I'd be able to tell more with headphones? What are CDs encoded at?

 

[LongCoolMother]

Originally posted by: n7
192 kps sounds great to me.

I can't tell the difference with anything higher.

same here. i have a very hard time discerning diff between 192kbps and 320kbps audio.

my source is as follows

Panasonic RV31k Digital out->Audio Alchemy DDE 3.0 with power station 5->Eichmann bullet plugs with belden 89259 cables->Meta42 (maxed out specs el2002 buffers) amplifier with elpa 24v linear regulated power supply->Beyerdynamic DT880 headphones

even when using my ety e4ps its very hard to hear a diff between 192 kbps audio and cd quality. i suppose it would be even harder to hear the improvement of analog records over CDs. or DVD-As over CDs.

 

[vi edit]

192k is the sweet spot compromise for me between space & sound quality.

That's what I encode at.

 

[Strk]

VBR > 320 😀

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
i cant tell the difference even on my $800 pioneer stereo..... did i just waste $800 on a pioneer stereo when my hearing is so bad that i cant tell the difference between 128K MP3 and music from the real CD?

no.....its probably your speakers or you are not an audiophile

So if you're not an audiophile, who cares if it's 128kbps?

 

[Legend]

An old roomate told me we can't tell the difference because our ears are too limited.

My ass. I can tell a huge difference between CD audio and DVD audio, and that's several times higher 320. I'm using Klipsch 5.1 Ultras and an Audigy 2 ZS.

128 sounds like total ass.