In a message dated 11/2/99 12:08:25 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Even at 320bps you can hear the difference in MP3 much easier than you can
on MD >>
As can I. :-) One thing about mp3 that has gotten my curiosity up is
whether or not different sound cards can affect the sound quality of an mp3.
I have an older SoundBlaster 32 and I've *always* been able to tell the
difference between a source and the mp3 equivalent up to 320 kbps. It hasn't
been so much that the music sounds altered like it does under 192 kbps but
that the bass and treble seem to be cut. Would that be a product of my sound
card or the actually encoding scheme?
The reason I ask is my father, who is an avid mp3 downloader, burns most of
his selections into CD-R. Played over my same system, those songs sound *so*
much cleaner than when through my sound card -- not just in frequency
response but also there's less of the sparking/warbling/annoying as hell
sound from mp3s. That would lead me to think the decoder is better, but like
MD shouldn't the end result always be the same? Regardless, MD wins hands
down. He's got some songs burned into CD-R that were 80 kbps. He claims he
can't tell anything wrong with him. Poor, poor old man. :-)
~Zach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
