<< prev | goto page
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author | Message | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oh, and guitargirl, why not just compress the tracks down to 320kbps rather than 256kbps (if you are planning to compress them less)? I'd say go for the 150s. I haven't used the other low end Sony models, but the 150s are very adequate for me for casual listening. _________________ EisleyForever wrote: you're A-list in my heart! MAKECOLDPLAYHISTORY |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 | Posts: 8868 | Location: Saturn, the Bringer of Old Age
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DRMS_7888 wrote: Oh, and guitargirl, why not just compress the tracks down to 320kbps rather than 256kbps (if you are planning to compress them less)? I might. I'm considering deleting a lot of my library (since I don't listen to about half of it) so re-importing my CDs that I actually listen to (meaning I don't skip them when I shuffle my library or that I listen to the album regularly) is not a big deal. I am considering whether the extra space they'll take up is worth it. I just got a nice pair of headphones and I read that with nice headphones, 128 kbps is blatantly obvious. I'm pretty obsessive about quality- my movies have to be at least 1500 kbps in picture quality. _________________ j'ai pas envie d'être un robot, métro boulot dodo -Kelli |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 03 Apr 2005 | Posts: 1720 | Location: utah
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DRMS_7888 wrote: golly andrew wrote: I have $40ish Sennheiser's (HD212Pro). For the Mozart, the 256 just seemed louder. For R.E.M., the cymbals are a giveaway. 128 makes it sound like sizzling bacon.
I really want to do a blind test though. I wish there was a site that would present it as a quiz. We could just make them for eachother with audacity or something. Yea but it'd be so obvious knowing which file is bigger and all. And yes I know I could just not look but a quiz would be so much more fun. And does anyone have DBAMPCONVERTER?? That was my favoritest freeware ever. Now they charge and I haven't tracked it down since my harddrive crashed. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 23 Mar 2005 | Posts: 1919 | Location: In a glass case of emotion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
golly andrew wrote: DRMS_7888 wrote: golly andrew wrote: I have $40ish Sennheiser's (HD212Pro). For the Mozart, the 256 just seemed louder. For R.E.M., the cymbals are a giveaway. 128 makes it sound like sizzling bacon.
I really want to do a blind test though. I wish there was a site that would present it as a quiz. We could just make them for eachother with audacity or something. Yea but it'd be so obvious knowing which file is bigger and all. And yes I know I could just not look but a quiz would be so much more fun. And does anyone have DBAMPCONVERTER?? That was my favoritest freeware ever. Now they charge and I haven't tracked it down since my harddrive crashed. Well, thinking the long way, couldn't you take a 128kbps compressed bit, and then add it to the same clip (that has a higher bitrate). Even though the whole file might read as 320kbps, half of it should be compressed more. _________________ EisleyForever wrote: you're A-list in my heart! MAKECOLDPLAYHISTORY |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 | Posts: 8868 | Location: Saturn, the Bringer of Old Age
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I can't hear a difference, but I think I've permanently damaged my ears over the years (and I don't just mean the natural changes in hearing due to age). So sound quality isn't that important to me (to some extent) because I can't tell small differences. But yeah... what you're using definitely makes a difference. I bought some Grado SR 80s a while back for $100... and I could hear things on albums that I'd literally never heard before. They're awesome. They do have their drawbacks in that they don't block out noise... and others around you can hear what you're hearing. But they're fantastic for listening at home. I found them at an upscale electronics store where I got to listen to them before I purchased. I opted for the SR 80s because I couldn't hear a difference after that. They started to get really expensive anyway. _________________ "If you're a ninja, every day is like friday." -Jamie M. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 28 Jan 2003 | Posts: 2857 | Location: Lake Jackson, TX
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I'm going to assume you'd re-rip your songs using iTunes, so if you do that I strongly recommend ripping at either 256kbps or 320kbps VBR. Personally I tend to rip my music at V0 VBR using EAC. _________________ |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 30 Sep 2006 | Posts: 1419 | Location: Maine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mooncutter wrote: I'm going to assume you'd re-rip your songs using iTunes, so if you do that I strongly recommend ripping at either 256kbps or 320kbps VBR. Personally I tend to rip my music at V0 VBR using EAC. It sounds like VBR is the best option. I can't see any reason not to use it, and I'm surprised I haven't heard more about it. Thanks for the tip! _________________ j'ai pas envie d'être un robot, métro boulot dodo -Kelli |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 03 Apr 2005 | Posts: 1720 | Location: utah
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joined: 05 Nov 2002 | Posts: 1479 | Location: Dallas, Texas
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Laughing City Forum Index -> Music -> Article on 128 kbps vs. 256 kbps
Page 2 of 2 << prev | goto page
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|