On TechRepublic: Linux desktops have tanked: Get over it
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 4 of 8:
Next »
« Previous
Not the same quality
It's not the same quality as the lower bit rate versions by a long shot. Do yourself a favor before you write off the importance of this change - get the same song in both 256K and 128K format (you could rip them from your own CD if you don't want to invest $2). Listen to the 256K version first. Now listen to the 128K version - unless you suffer from hearing loss or are using a $5 pair of headphones/earbuds, the 128K version will sound like it's coming from underwater when compared head to head with the same song at 256K.

128K may be OK for many musical styles (especially "mainstream" urban genres), but a lot of depth is lost compared to the 256K version. This becomes especially obvious in progressive rock or classical recordings where there are as many quiet passages as there are loud ones and the engineer wasn't aiming at the mythical 0db CD.
Posted by: Timpraetor   Posted on: 08/22/07 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

(NT) I wonder if Bitty will buy some :o)  Jack-Booted EULA | 08/21/07
Encoding quality?  pointzerotwo | 08/22/07
It's too large for me!!  DeepFreeze3 | 08/22/07
Not the same quality  Timpraetor | 08/22/07
192k is the happy medium...  nix_hed | 08/22/07
Tracking  r_bigcat@... | 08/22/07
Good Point about Mal-Wart  Old Timer 8080 | 08/23/07
Why download poor quality music?  shanedr | 08/24/07

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here