Posted by G.T. on 01/04/06 01:31

"Verne Arase" <VerneA@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BFE07C1D0012DDF6F0335550@news.giganews.com...
> On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 15:27:46 -0600, G.T. wrote
> (in article <11rgiaj8brcv2f9@corp.supernews.com>):
>
> > Of course iTMS is playing to the lowest common denominator, people who
> > don't bother looking beyond the ends of their noses for new stuff.
>
> Actually, in order to get the quality of a 128 kpbs AAC, you need to code
> your mp3s at about 192 kbps.

No, around 160kbps is more like it.

> When I used emusic, 128 was all that was available.

When, back in the dark ages? eMusic has been VBR for as long as I've been
using them. They currently do have some stuff at 128 for labels that don't
want unencumbered mp3s to be better quality.

>
> When Apple developed ITMS, no one else was playing nice with Macs.
>

That may be true.

Greg

[Back to original message]