MP3 quality_Windows vs Linux

Chat about just about anything else
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 22174
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: MP3 quality_Windows vs Linux

Post by xenopeek » Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:33 pm

Moth ears. Certain moths can hear up to 300 Khz. They hear radio signals?
Image

User avatar
Arch_Enemy
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1015
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Re: MP3 quality_Windows vs Linux

Post by Arch_Enemy » Wed Apr 04, 2018 5:23 pm

trytip wrote:
Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:19 pm
it is topping out at 20k i could get a few more Hz by using constant 320 but for portable players and phones vbr320 is enough. anything more is just excess for people that have bat ears :mrgreen:
That and most audio equipment tops out at 20K as well. Although there are some that go higher! :D
I have travelled 35629424162.9 miles in my lifetime

One thing I would suggest, create a partition a ~28G partition as /. Partition the rest as /Home.
When the system fails, reinstall and use the exact same username and all your 'stuff' comes back to you.

User avatar
trytip
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:20 pm

Re: MP3 quality_Windows vs Linux

Post by trytip » Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:28 pm

in flac format zooming in and eliminating some noise using dBV^2 you can really tell if it's a good source. anything made into .mp3 from this format can be just as good which is why i first decode to flac from a cd instead of going straight to .mp3
Image

Image
Image

Mattyboy
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:17 pm

Re: MP3 quality_Windows vs Linux

Post by Mattyboy » Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:26 pm

I always rip to FLAC Lossless and store files that way. I've got BIG hard drives and many of them. I also convert those files to MP3 for my portable devices.

When dealing with digital music the myth 'better quality cables' is just that, a myth. With digital its all ones and zeros. You're either getting a signal or not. Analog sound from vinyl for example does benefit from high quality cables. Actually hearing a difference depends on many factors... is not going to sound good though laptop speakers is it? If you have high quality amp and speakers or decent headphones the format differences are noticeable and so are the different MP3 bit-rates.

For the format you should be aiming for high quality variable bit rates for MP3. CBR uses unessential space. Often you'll find MP3 downloads coded at 320kbps CBR, this is over kill. 192kbps is pretty poor. Aim for a VBR ( variable bit rate ) coming out at an average of 256kbps that's the absolute best you can achieve from the format. Providing those rates are available from the original source, transcoding will not improve the quality.

Talking about FLAC Lossless and the differences the human ear can detect. On a decent sound system the higher quality is definitely noticeable over MP3 on 16bit lossless but, most will say, not 24bit or, like from Pono music, 24bit 192khz. Those higher rates are definitely unneeded and little more that a marketing gimmick and excuse to charge a premium.

VBR for MP3, 16bit for Lossless can't got wrong.

In Linux soundconverter does a damn fine job or re-coding FLAC files to MP3.

Post Reply

Return to “Open chat”