Posted by Broadway Blue on 03/31/07 00:27

NRen2k5 wrote:
> "����������ï..> wrote:
>> MP3 is a relatively high quality compression system (if you use 320
>> and NOT Joint Stereo)
>
> Actually, in MP3, a properly implemented Joint Stereo will be better
> than pure L-R Stereo. (See LAME.)

What?!! Encoding an MP3 file @ 320kbps, - which is what was mentioned -
means there obviously isn't a space constraint, (as 320kbps is overkill for
most scenarios). So why would anyone use Joint Stereo to save a few KBs, if
they're encoding as high as 320kbps? If the original source was true
stereo, Joint Stereo couldn't actually be "better". 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.

[Back to original message]