On 2017-01-24 19:18, Budge wrote:
My understanding is that if I convert to mp3 I lose more. Not sure if
this is true.
MP3 files can be created at different bit rates. Perhaps you should
take some sample
audio files and create some MP3 versions at different rates and see
whether you can
actually tell that even the high bit rate MP3s are less accurate than
original files.
If you can tell, then fine, keep the huge detailed files. But if in
fact you cannot
tell, sacrifice a bit of quality.
I have some original recordings made in the last year or two at choral
concerts - mostly
24 bit, 44.1 khz, stereo uncompressed WAV files, made with ecent quality
condenser mics.
I was surprised how hard it was to tell the originals apart from eg
320kbps MP3 let alone
eg 160kbps. And I was listening extremely carefully, criticising my own
recordings.
I came to the conclusion that what one might call blurring of the
details of the sound,
caused by the acoustic of the concert venue and audience noise, already
hid detail even in
the original files, and the consequent blurring of compression as MP3
didn't take away as
much detail as I'd expected.
(I'm 57; I expect my hearing is no longer what it used to be.)
--
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own
_______________________________________________
get_iplayer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer
