> Moreover consider that Rivendell chooses mp2 as compressing coding, > and it is quite different compared to mp3. Mp3 outperforms mp2 at the > same bitrate, so from a theoretical point of view your imported > mp3@256kbps will probably sound even "better" than imported > mp2@384kbps.
I am not looking to start an MP2 / MP3 debate, but I have always found that MP2's sound a whole lot better then MP3's, provided the source that the file is compressed from is original uncompressed audio. Furthermore it has been shown that mp2's (when compressed from a raw / uncompressed audio format) get through a broadcast audio chain a lot cleaner then mp3's. Having said that, storage is cheap now days. Your best performance will be uncompressed raw / PCM audio (or as some call it, WAV - even though .wav is in reality just a container for audio) Lorne Tyndale _______________________________________________ Rivendell-dev mailing list Rivendell-dev@lists.rivendellaudio.org http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev
