|
|
Posted by Elliott Roper on 01/03/06 19:54
In article <Fozuf.51054$DQ4.1265882@weber.videotron.net>, NRen2k5
<napsterneorenegade@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not talking about you in your car. I'm talking about ordinary
> people, in ordinary listening environments. And believe me, in most
> people's living rooms, they /don't/ need a $1000+ hifi to tell the
> difference between iTunes' crummy MP3's and its AAC's. Anybody should be
> able to tell the difference even straight from the iPod with the stock
> earbuds.
Are you asserting that Apple destroys mp3 encoded material on playback
or that they encode it badly?
I ask this, because mp3 at 128 kbits/sec plays badly on iTunes, Finder
and VLC on this Mac, however and wherever it was encoded. Certainly
worse in most cases than the 128kbits/sec AAC encoded stuff from the
music store, bad and all as that is.
That leads me to believe that all 128 kbits/sec mp3 is suitable only
for playing in a loud rattly car while you are paying more attention to
your driving than the music as, of course, you should be.
Even though my ears as old as the rest of me, I reckon that 160
Kbit/sec AAC is the minimum bitrate that can't be distinguished from
the CD original on modestly priced living room equipment, and that
equates to at least 192 Kbit/sec mps and I don't care whose encoder put
it there.
--
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|