Well, It depends on what you want to archive.
I use to archive radio broadcasts of interest for me, and, when in stereo, I use a simple -q 0 --strictly-enforce-iso which means 128 kbps. it's good enough. Now, for music at cd quality, nothing absolutely fine. I have several nome mp3 playing machines (terratec pogo (diskman) mp3po, and Brujo). There really is a difference especially in dynamic compared to the original cd played on my Wadia. But, of course, these are not same category equipments! On Fri, 2 Aug 2002 11:00:34 -0700 (PDT), Chris Holt wrote: >That's pretty strong. How about "I would not" or "You should not". >If that's too much typing an IMHO would suffice. > >"no perceivable differences" implies a very subjective topic as there are no doubt >differences in what each of us is capable of percieving. > >r3mix preset works for me, with my ears and my best equipment, but I have no doubt >that there are those who say they can tell the difference. But in the end, if I am >archiving the music for ME, why would I care? > >The latest messages I can find in the archive are from 2001. So can you give me a >hint as to what you are on about? > >--- "Jaroslav Lukesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Do not use MP3 for archiving. See my latest mails in archive. > >Chris >_______________________________________________ >mp3encoder mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder > ---------------------------- Michel SUCH TEAM OS/2 FRANCE ICQ # 51654489 _______________________________________________ mp3encoder mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
