|
Posted by Broadway Blue on 03/31/07 17:01
NRen2k5 wrote:
> Broadway Blue wrote:
>>
>> It might not sound any different and might use less space, so I would
>> accept "more efficient", but "better" than the original source?
>> Methinks not.
>
> Of course nothing can be better than the original source.
Oh good. You had me worried there for a minute!
>But one encoding method is better than another.
Indeed. Which is why MP3 files encoded at the same bit rate can vary
depending on which MP3 encoder is used even. But I personally wouldn't
use Joint Stereo for a MP3 file encoded as high as 320 kbps.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|