firedog;461713 Wrote: > > I've seen all those "scientific" tests. Basically, they prove nothing. > Why? Again, what equipment was used, and how was it set up? Is it > really good enough to bring out the differences? Some of the tests you > bring up fail on these counts. >
You also probably have to be under 25 years old to hear any major differences and you should not have been listening to 100 dB pop all the time. Over 50 your hearing greatly deteriorates. Most standard FM broadcast don't seem to be much better quality then 128 kb/s. Anyone who uses an $10, or even standard iPod earplugs also can ignore this discussion completely. I rip CD's standard on 192 kb/s for popular music or older recordings up to 320 kb/s for complex classical music. Once I had a rip I didn't like (192 kb/s) for which I could hear a small but discernible difference with the original CD. I re-ripped at 320 kb/s. I think now it is o.k. 'Radified Guide to Ripping & Encoding CD audio (with EAC & the LAME MP3 encoder)' (http://mp3.radified.com/) has references into research of and listening to ripping. [PS. I wished I still had the hearing of 25]. -- RabanePaco Squeezebox really fulfills my dreams: having all my music at my fingertips (same as on my iPod and on my computers) and lots of good radio stations. Project: Ripping and tagging the second half of my 600 odd CD's. Rip, music manager and tag editing: *'MediaMonkey' (www.mediamonkey.co)*. With iTunes the only good music managers for classical. But MM is by far *the best.* Tag editor: *'Mp3Tag' (www.mp3tag.de/en/)*. The *only good* (and very good) tag editor. Because it is the only one that uses *regular expressions*. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ RabanePaco's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21574 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67679 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
