|
|
Posted by name on 06/13/06 18:17
ML wrote:
> name wrote:
>
> >
> > Since it seems people are either unable or unwilling to provide some
> > examples, I've downloaded some music myself and I have to say I can
> > hear the difference in quality fairly clearly between 128 kbps and 192
> > kbps in most tests. It seems 192 kbps sounds a little warmer or fuller.
> > <snip>
>
> I'm wondering if you did a double blind study, or did you *know* which
> you were listening to as you compared them. Also, did you include 160
> kbps in the test?
>
> --
> ML
I just put two mp3s in a folder on my portable player, one 128 kbps and
one 192 kbps.. then I play and press forward repeatedly for a couple of
times so I don't know which one I'm listening to... then I can reliable
guess which one (high or low bitrate) I'm listening to. Although the
difference is still rather subtle and I couldn't tell whether a given
mp3 was 192 kbps or 128 kbps if I'm unable to compare the same mp3 at
both bitrates.
I guess a more reliable test would involve different methods of
encoding mp3s given an original on CD or file in lossless format.
Perhaps some encoders deliver better results encoding at specific
bitrates. I do think it's possible that using a good encoder can make a
bigger difference than encoding at a higher bitrate, but that's just a
guess and I have no hard evidence to back that up. Of course I'd
appreciate it if someone who is more experienced in this respect can
give some examples of the difference in quality between various
encoders. Personally I tend to (re)encode everything I download using
dbpoweramp (I guess it employs the LAME mp3 encoder) and mmjb if
dbpoweramp fails. So when I collect something at bitrates above 128, I
convert it back to 128 and when I download other formats like FLAC or
lossless, I convert it to 128 kbps as well.
It would also be an interesting experiment to repeatedly encode
something at 128 kbps to see how many cycles of encoding it takes
before detrimental effects on the audio quality become apparent.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|