Reply to All / Reply to List On Tuesday 11 October 2011 22.57.38 Atte André Jensen wrote: ... > > My question is: is this really a fair way to judge the artifacts > introduced by encoding? My subjective opinion: -Probably yes and no. Yes because this artifacts often are audible, especially when you know the stuff and No because most people don't care and actually like some of them (like stronger compression and more generated noise which makes things louder). This kind of encodings is (I believe) about fooling the ears by removing "masked" info and put everything that make sounds in a context, so often, we don't really hear or notice this artifacts when we are listening to the music. That said, I believe that lossy compression do reduce sound quality, but in many, maybe most (?) cases, I can't say that a good quality lossy compressed piece of music sounds bad without listening to the original, which often sounds like shit anyway this days. I often notice that even high quality MP3s often makes essing stronger on music I have been mixing, but that might be the way I adjust things (EQ, HPF, deess and so on), so I don't really know. I do also dislike many WMA files, which in my opinion often generates strong circle saw like artifacts. But all this might be my ears. So I think you should let your ears be the judge of what's good or bad, and 128 kbps/q=3 is not interesting when we speak HiFi anyway. 300 kbps and higher is much more interesting IM(subjective)O. Jostein _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
