Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2002 4:42 pm
by sandrob
what is optimal format for uploaded songs on planetz's music?
i use audiograbber's lame encoder: 160 or 192kbit/s resolution.
i hear that encoding hurt sound (sometimes less - sometimes more), but if i convert with 320kbit/s is it to much for downloading?
what is usual (and kind)?
is it some rule?
how you guys do encode yours wavs?
Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2002 5:01 pm
by marcuspocus
128k is the bare minimum just to be able to say that it's suppose to be music (i love to exagerate
)
Usualy, i encode in 192k, i found it was OK...
Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2002 9:28 pm
by at0m
128kB/s is used on mp3.com. Often I find lower bitrates, rarely higher.
I use 192 locally, plus I got sufficient bandwidth to download songs at that rate. But servers like here or people on dial-in connections might not have that 'luxury' I'm afraid. So I upload 128kB/s mp3's.
Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2002 9:30 pm
by at0m
On 2002-10-17 18:01, marcuspocus wrote:
128k is the bare minimum just to be able to say that it's suppose to be music (i love to exagerate
)
Listen to John's music. It's at 96kB/s. I can't say it makes his music sound bad
Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2002 11:15 pm
by marcuspocus
On 2002-10-17 18:01, marcuspocus wrote:
i love to exagerate
On 2002-10-17 22:30, at0mic wrote:
Listen to John's music. It's at 96kB/s. I can't say it makes his music sound bad
To say the least, i found his music inspiring!
Posted: Fri Oct 18, 2002 6:10 pm
by Michu
interesting stuff about mp3 encoding can be found in "Quality" section of
http://www.r3mix.net
Posted: Fri Oct 18, 2002 6:23 pm
by kensuguro
wow, that's some deep stuff. Never gave mp3s that much thought... I think 128bit is just fine though. It's sure a quality hit, but I think most of what people make here are so good that such a hit won't be much of an influence.. or am I being to positive here. hehe.
Which does point out some interesting points.. Good content sure does live through all sorts of things.. bad mixing, bad mastering, bad medium.. The musicality can't be degraded, just sound quality. It's kind of intersting sometimes to encode at a suprisingly low bitrate, and see how much the tune changes. Cuz the "texture" portion brought out by all the comping, EQ and effects are mostly lost... but the parts that barely remain are my basic intentions.. and I'm like, "well, ok, I guess I can loose those, but not these". But this won't work if your intentions are very "hi-fi" so.. oh well, back to the question again.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: kensuguro on 2002-10-18 19:29 ]</font>
Posted: Fri Oct 18, 2002 9:36 pm
by bassdude
To my ears, I've found 128 does hit the quality a bit too much. Try it on a solo acoustic guitar track and you'll probably be able to hear what it does. But maybe for electronic music it doesn't matter as much? Anyway I've been sticking to 192 lately.