In Reply to: RE: Thanks.... posted by Tony Lauck on December 10, 2011 at 11:41:40:
Back around 1998 or so, I did a bunch of testing on the old Xing mp3 encoder when i first started ripping CD's. It was fast but poor quality compared to today's algorithms. back then i could tolerate 256 kbps music off Xing. With today's versions of LAME, I do not notice any issue with 192 kbps with music.
IMO, encoder quality is important rather than generally maligning the fact that some music is lossy encoded. Furthermore, refinement of psychoacoustic models have been significant and i really appreciate the ABX work at places like Hydrogen Audio.
Of course, for my music library, FLAC is my preferred archival format and happily enjoy streamed transcoded 192 kbps audio to my computer/iPad/Android.
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Thanks.... - Archimago 12/10/1117:25:51 12/10/11 (2)
- RE: Thanks.... - Tony Lauck 06:27:22 12/11/11 (1)
- RE: Thanks.... - Archimago 08:03:59 12/13/11 (0)