Audio Bitrate

[Heartyace]

Has anyone noticed songs 200+ bit rates sound godly compared to songs under it.

I'd post a example, but all songs on youtube have under 200 bits.

[Jin-Roh]

Has anyone noticed songs 200+ bit rates sound godly compared to songs under it.

I'd post a example, but all songs on youtube have under 200 bits.

That really depends on the style of music. For example, DnB is far too fast and loud to even tell what is going on.

[SourChicken]

Guess what. Lossless audio is even better..


Yeah, seriously.

[Jaydude]

Depends, A song could have bad studio quality and bitrate probably wouldn't make it better.

[Heartyace]

Well damn this was fast, I have audiophile equipment so I happen to notice the slightest difference.

Of course bad studio quality will sound bad, but who listens to that, right?

I just broken in my new headphones and i'm remodeling my play list to fit it.

Right now, anything below 200 is getting deleted and replaced.

Flac (I think it is called) seems to sounds flip'n great.

[Jin-Roh]

but who listens to that, right?

Judging by the amount of 'pirated' songs, a lot of us... lol

[postrook]

as long as it's at least 192 kbps, it sounds great to me. 128 kbps sounds kinda shit.

lossless audio takes up too much hard drive space. can't be bothered with it.

for really good quality, just listen to CDs or records *shrugs*

[Azriel2k3]

Lossless and flac are both audio sampling closer to that of what's put on a cd when it's made and it shows in file size. Most of my stuff is Variable bit rate which sounds just great.

[Xenonight2]

VBR and 320kbps are about as good as you can get with most consumer sound systems.

You can go ahead and get FLAC/Lossless quality, but chances are, you don't have a sound system good enough to be able to hear a difference between those and the 320 kbps songs.

[Heartyace]

VBR and 320kbps are about as good as you can get with most consumer sound systems.

You can go ahead and get FLAC/Lossless quality, but chances are, you don't have a sound system good enough to be able to hear a difference between those and the 320 kbps songs.

Audiophile equipment with sensitive ears. I think I'm fine with these M4As

[Raiyne]

Lossless and flac are both audio sampling closer to that of what's put on a cd when it's made and it shows in file size. Most of my stuff is Variable bit rate which sounds just great.

It's the exact same, just compressed differently with the different formats. People use FLAC cause it takes up much less space than .WAV files.


The main thing about compressed audio is the high-end drop off and the overall compression that gets applied to the audio.

More info about MP3 encoding can be found here, it's a good read: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may00/articles/mp3.htm

[Hizumi]

must be 320 AT THE VERY LEAST for me.

[Heartyace]

must be 320 AT THE VERY LEAST for me.

That is very close to impossible for every song, man.

But for english songs Flac is the lowest, French and such other 320.

[SourChicken]

That is very close to impossible for every song, man.

But for english songs Flac is the lowest, French and such other 320.

Why is that close to impossible? If you actually buy your music then it isn't a problem in the slightest.

[postrook]

if you actually care about super high audio quality, you should only be listening to records and cds.

[Heartyace]

if you actually care about super high audio quality, you should only be listening to records and cds.

For those low on funds after buying their equipment, We care.

But I'm still looking in to getting international records/cds.

[Hizumi]

Why is that close to impossible? If you actually buy your music then it isn't a problem in the slightest.

Exactly. I buy all of my music now. Back in my pirating days I had to settle for 192-200 something shit. Rarely a 320kbp rip to be seen, I like being able to hear everything I can.