Thanks Bruce. That certainly clears it up about bit rate. Yes, a talking book encoded at 32 sounds real good. Sounds better than the NLS machine we play it on, eh? Mimi
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Toews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PC audio discussion list. " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 6:51 PM Subject: Re: Bit rate > It's a personal preference thing. A lot of us, for music, have no problem > with 128-big music files. For some reason, some (not all but some) people > who prefer higher bit rates are of the opinion that if you don't agree > with them, it's somehow a personal attack on them. 32-bit is the generally > accepted bitrate (mono) for talking books. A well-encoded 32-bitrate > talking book sounds quite good. > > Bruce > > -- > Bruce Toews > E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net > For the best oldies anywhere visit http://www.treasureislandoldies.com > > On Tue, 11 May 2004, mimi wrote: > > > Hello, everyone, including happy encoders everywhere! > > > > Got a question for ya! How come some of you prefer music at 192? Does that really make a difference than 128? Just wondering. > > > > I also encode talking books. Started doing this some time last year. When I first started, I was doing books at 128. Or some setting like that. I ddiscovered I could put up to nine NLS sides at that setting. But it caused me to split some longer books between two andsometimes three discs. So, eventually, I thought, hey, wait a minute, I guess I could adjust the bit rate to a smaller setting. I played around with it and arrived at 32 for talking books, because all they are, as you know is someone reading a book anyway. Does it really matter all that much? I run my NLS player through an older stereo and once in a blue moon, find a book I cannot save or improve. It sounds so bad I could not encode it. Have you notice some of the NLS books don't really measure up? Sometimes, parts of a book is recorded too loud, parts are too soft, and I even came across some with hiss in it. Now, I don't have those fancy editing programs like SoundF Forge or Cool Edit. I cannot ! > afford it! I have not figured out how to use Gold Wave, and when I tried well, found it a bit puzzling. Anyway, I use freeware and I guess some of you know about Cdex 1.5. I like it, even if it does not have noise reduction and other features. I'm just glad to be able to encode tapes. I do CD's too, so often switch between those formats. I get chided by a friend of mine because I don't know how to use a CD database. But the CD feature in Cdex is disabled when you use Record from Analog Input. Anyway, just wanted to ask you guys the question about bit rate and why the difference. Are there more highs at 192 than 128? > > > > Regards, > > Mimi > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... > > http://www.pc-audio.org > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > > $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more > > Get It Now At www.doteasy.com > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... > http://www.pc-audio.org > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
