|
|
Posted by Broadway Blue on 12/02/07 23:51
Eeyore wrote:
> Richard Crowley wrote:
>
>> "Eeyore" wrote...
>>> Jack wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You're tilting at windmills. Listen to the dadburned files! I just
>>>> closed my eyes and heard the difference even better. The MP3 is
>>>> significantly cleaner than the WMA, which isn't usually the case
>>>> with those formats at 128 kbps.
>>>
>>> Why are you even bothering with 128 kbps files ? They're a waste of
>>> time.
>>
>> That is exactly what I was thinking about this entire discussion.
>> WMA (and MP3 and Ogg, etc etc) is what it is. If you don't
>> like how it sounds on some particular music, then bump the
>> bitrate or use some other encoding. End of discussion.
>> Unless you are developing audio compression codecs, in
>> which case, this is the wrong newsgroup.
>
> PC World UK has 250GB drives for just £45.
>
> You'll get about 420 CDs on that *uncompressed* for 11 pence each !
>
> Why on earth bother with compression ?
Well, if all you own is a 1GB flash MP3 player or a 4 GB iPod Nano, not
compressing your music would result in having very few tracks on your
portable player to listen to!!!
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|