> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert J. Chassell
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 02:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: iTunes for Windo$e
>
>
> Miller, Jeffrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
> ... I'm one of those freaks who can hear the sound quality
> difference between mp3s and cds; drives me nuts sometimes.
>
> Just curious: for you, what is the sound quality difference
> between CDs and music recorded using the Ogg Vorbis format?
> (I have been told that ogg does better with classical than
> mp3 and about equal with pop, but don't know whether that is true.)
I haven't used Ogg Vorbis - I haven't really dug into all the various encoding
possibilities for the MP3 format (OV is just another schema for encoding, yes?)
> In any case, what if the music is recorded a higher bit rate,
> say at 192 k rather than 128 k? Also, does the variable bit
> rate used by ogg make any difference?
Until the loss of the compression is less than ~5%, I can still hear the difference in
certain types and styles of music. Generally speaking, I find the dynamic stereo
qualities of a recording get flattened, and the middle-high end becomes, for lack of a
better term, "hollow".. not quite echoy, but flat and without any sort of crips
reverberation to the tone. Specifically this harms albums by artists as varied as
Blackalicious (hip-hop) to Loreena McKennitt ("world") to Lisa Loeb (pop). I've also
found that much of the Bethoven and Grieg I ripped onto my iPod share this... tonal
wash-out.
MP3 seems good for techno and pop, or really any kind of music where subtle tones and
shading of the music don't matter much. Still, there's no better way to store and
access Wang-Chung ^_^
-j-
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
