#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
2) MP3 could certainly store much higher frequencies, but that would go right against its purpose of "stripping away what human ear can't hear in order to improve compression efficiency". It would be very much like buying the best color TV in existence so that you could watch the classical movies from the 1930's - it would work, but given that those moves are black-and-white, it would be a waste of money. |
#32
|
||||
|
||||
Yes that is what I pointed out, each channel holds 22050 Hz x 2 = 44100 Hz.
I have done some tests. Track 1 = MP3 320Kbps 7.89MB Track 2 = True Wav File. 34.8MB The Flac file = 26.2MB That is the maximum that an MP3 file can go. I have to say that I was surprised by this test. I have analysed more than millions of MP3 files and never really seen any MP3 file going as high as this one. it topped 20Hkz, lossy but still very well encoded by me. Well pepack you were right however I still could notice the difference in quality as I have a very good high end headphones model number Denom AH-D5000. This conversation was good to clarify some things. Regards, |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
I am not going to argue any further. You have no idea what you are talking about, mixing apples and oranges.
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Actually I think he's right. The psychoacoustic model originally used for encoding MP3s assumed that humans can't hear tones above 16kHz so those are capped, regardless of the sample rate and encoding quality. LAME may have found a way around that spec limitation, I don't know.
|
#35
|
||||
|
||||
He's partially right, but he is mixing two very different things (signal frequency and sampling frequency).
Quote:
|
#36
|
||||
|
||||
...regardless of the sample rate and encoding quality.
(Just to avoid a potential misunderstanding, I'm not talking about the low pass filter applied at lower quality settings even by modern audio codecs to keep the quality of tones not filtered acceptable. I'm talking about how by design decision most MP3 encoders/settings don't ever touch "CD quality" = 22kHz. To be honest besides clipping artifacts I personally haven't seen an MP3 rendering tones way above 16kHz yet. Modern codecs do that just fine at higher quality settings.) |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
I personally like to rip all of my CDs with Exact Audio Copy and FLAC and then pack the CDs away somewhere so that they won't become damaged or anything like that.
MP3 and AAC format are still good for portable players though. Even if the player does support lossless codecs there's usually not enough space to store all of my songs, so.... But yeah, since I have a big enough hard drive I just try to keep everything in archival lossless.
__________________
The statement below is false. The statement above is true. One man was smart, he felt smart. Two men were smart, they smelt farrr...darn it! I'll never get it right. What is "the box" that people are supposed to think outside of anyway? Hmm. Maybe it's similar to the Borg from Star Trek who dwelled as a collective hive-mind within a...box/cube. Those that deviated from this hive-mind would, in effect, be thinking outside of the box. it has both a figurative and a literal meaning. |
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Mh... I use FLAC (single file + cuesheet). File size doesn't actually matter for me, because huge HDD's are quite cheap these days. If one 1TB HDD is filled, I just buy another one. MP3 is still fine for stuff I'm unable to get anywhere else. Though, I prefer self-ripped FLAC files most.
|
|
|