| > On my HQ headphones I pick out many 192 mp3's. There are _a LOT_ more
| > instances where 192 isn't enough and the -V1 picks out a good higher
| > bitrate frame than an instance where VBR screws up. (vbr_mt that is)
| >
| > A few months ago a 192 was somewhat considered perfect for me, but
| > when I upgraded hardware, it was not so hard to find flaws. If you
| > want the best possible mp3's, just take 256cbr or 320. proven
| > statistically to be of the same Q as original material. (ti: you can
| > distinguish some test sounds, but 256 does not sound bad, as being the
| > exception).
| >
|
|
| I've been told several times that at 192kbs or above, mp2 is likely to be
better than mp3. True or False ?
| If true, would it be difficult to add a mp2 option in lame (I don't know
to which extent mp3 and mp2 differ) ?
| If no, isn't it the solution for top quality ?
|
| Pierre
I prefer mp2 starting from bitrates at 256kbit/44kHz, 192kbit for 32kHz
should have some minor artifacts, but different kind than mp3 has.
Jaroslav Lukesh
--------------------------------------------------
note: (Bill) Gates to Hell!
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
