|
|
Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis. |
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
|
Thread Tools |
All Im saying is, I dont believe any material (unless its something like silence or really basic material like a drone) can still sound as good as the same material with the maximum amount of bitrate given to it.
There's nowhere I can't reach.
ICEBOY
GnC Films |
How ya doing, buddy? Mario Kart DS: 498293-921939____ Star Fox Command: 155-576-696-451____ Metroid Prime Hunters: 4854-1233-4943____ Final Fantasy III: 506891214495____ Xfire: freuser____ Steam: Free.User____ |
Iceboy, I don't see a problem at all with using -b 320 in LAME if it's for your own personal use, is never going over a network, and you don't care about the extra space it takes up. All of which you've stated. LAME's VBR is meant to be as efficient as possible in the way it provides high quality at compressed file sizes.
Although, to be honest, your argument of "I dont believe in giving every frame anything less than the maximum for the best sound reproduction" could very well be used to justify keeping uncompressed WAVs around (or encoding into the lossless FLAC format). After all, MP3 is lossy. Don't you want the maximum quality for every moment of your audio? And there's certainly nothing more maximum than the exact original file! (Or one that outputs to exactly the same, in the case of FLAC.) The point is that MP3, at any bitrate, is meant to reduce the size of audio files. The goal of high quality VBR modes, notably the old --alt-preset standard and newer -V 2 --vbr-new, is to use just enough bits to attain audio that is audibly no different from the original. Admittedly, this is only a goal, and the implementation is based on the very complex human hearing model and can never be quite perfect. However, with that disclaimer out of the way, a huge majority of folks will never hear any difference between such VBR modes and 320Kbps CBR. Many people actually have a very difficult time hearing any difference between files just over 128Kbps and the original audio, when challenged to a scientific double-blind listening test. Seeing the 320, much larger than 128 or 160 or 192, has a strong psychological effect that can cause you to think it sounds better when that is not actually the case. But, as I said, it's your choice to make. Encoding in 320Kbps isn't a sin, maybe just a bit wasteful, but that's all. I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body? Good morning, post-apocalyptia!
Last edited by Moguta; Dec 30, 2006 at 01:02 AM.
|
I was speaking idiomatically.
LlooooydGEEEOOORGE
|
Bandwidth and disk space are preciously limited resources, guys!
[/1999] [/ozzie internets] What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now? |
As for psychological effects, etc. I know all about that. But I have fairly good hearing and I can definitely hear differences at 128k from the original WAV.
FELIPE NO
ICEBOY
GnC Films |
Most amazing jew boots
LlooooydGEEEOOORGE
|
Cal gets that a lot, don't worry about it.
There's nowhere I can't reach. |
Bandwidth -- not so much, but hard drives aren't yet cheap enough that everyone could afford a 500 GB HDD just for complete discographies of ten bands. Maybe in a few years.
This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it. Nothing wrong with not being strong
Nothing says we need to beat what's wrong Nothing manmade remains made long That's a debt we can't back out of |