|
|
Posted by NRen2k5 on 05/31/06 02:55
name wrote:
> Hi.
> Since a long time I've been collecting mp3s (classical, rock, pop,
> modern, jazz, blues, reggae, etc..) on p2p. I've always re-encoded
> everything I collected to 128 kbps, since this is said to be near-CD
> quality by many people. Often however, I encounter people who insist on
> 192 kbps or even lossless formats. Is there any proponent of 192 kpbs
> quality who is able to illustrate the advantage of this difference in
> quality by means of a few mp3s (or fragments of them) where this
> difference can be heared most clearly? I've heard that for piano music
> for instance it's very hard to distinguish between 128 kbps and 192
> kbps and I've tried this out for myself with piano music I'm fairly
> familiar with and couldn't pick out the higher quality in a blind test.
> So I'm interested in some music to put on my mp3 player (iaudio 5) to
> listen to with decent headphones (shure e3c) to see if it's really
> worth the extra diskspace to collect music at 192 kbps rather than 128
> kbps.
>
> Thanks in advance for any help with this request, kind regards, Niek
Seems to me that you've already proved to yourself that 192kbps isn't
worth it. :) Don't waste your time overtesting this.
- NRen2k5
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|