Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 259

Thread: Join RIAA Boycott

  1. #31
    Triple Platinum Member Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    US
    Posts
    892
    Apologies for being off topic.

  2. #32
    Titanium Member efc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,184
    Just a friendly nudge.
    Linux Mint Debian Edition

  3. #33
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,339
    What about online streamed music copied over the net?

    I guess because it is not as good as an MP3 (which does loose quality from the original) it should be ok.

    :P

  4. #34
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    34
    Originally posted by Big Booger
    I guess because it is not as good as an MP3 (which does loose quality from the original) it should be ok.
    128kbps is just below CD quality
    I rip my mp3's at 320kbps, there is no loss in quality.

  5. #35
    Member Bee-Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    91
    Egg, Big, Thor, Blackwar(still wondering were he is) and the knowledge based Conan it is good reading this thread, I want to comment on EFC's comment and as techzones supports this I will.....

    My method may not be one that many agree with but that is OK, as I value what other have to say

    I would like to see the the wealthy earn less, I think that a standard should be set, Global......maybe,? but it seems to me that people on TV or, those that can sing get millions, and as far as I know they still are.....what does this mean you ask.......?

    I can not give the answer but recording it off the radio and recording it form the net seems to offer ....(potentialy(sp) the same results therefore why the comotion(sp) I pride myself on originals not something I have D/loaded....the visual aspects mean something to me.

    If music is "stolen" or copied then I would class it as poorer quality.

    I agree that something sould be done to limit it but some bloke in the basement with his PC or tape recorder is just going to turn around and repeat the cycle.

    Interesting topic....

    Heathy has explained what is hapening to me, wife and I made redundant, and currently on dial-up(yes it suxs) so I will try to stay in touch but all I can say is Heathy knows his shit and would be a great resource to this fine community, ask him questions and get him thinking, if you are in London arrange a meeting, he is a great person to know.




    take care all and I will touch base when I can.

    BJ
    Last edited by Bee-Jay; September 17th, 2003 at 11:44 AM.

  6. #36
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,339
    Originally posted by sociallysleepy
    128kbps is just below CD quality
    I rip my mp3's at 320kbps, there is no loss in quality.
    Lossy Compression
    In a lossy compression scheme, as the name implies, some of the original information is discarded when it is compressed. Therefore, it is impossible to produce an exact replica of the original audio signal when the audio is played. There are many different schemes of lossy compression available. These schemes generally provide varying compression ratios. The most popular of these, the MPEG Layer 3 (MP3) format, is commonly employed with compression ratios of up to ten to one. All lossy compression schemes add artifacts to the compressed audio. Artifacts are small imperfections created by the loss of the actual audio data. Although its quality may not seem that poor, the audio that has been processed by a lossy digital compressor is no longer "CD Quality".

    ------------------------------------------------------------


    I was under the impression that at any bitrate, MPEG Layer 3 compression, would still reduce the quality.

    All lossy compression schemes add artifacts to the compressed audio. Artifacts are small imperfections created by the loss of the actual audio data.

    But if you say 320Kbit/s MP3 creates an exact duplicate of the original, I'll take you for your word.

  7. #37
    Titanium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    blk helo target, WA
    Posts
    2,864

  8. #38
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    34
    I have "better than average" hearing and I can say without a shadow of a doubt I'd prefer a 320kbps mp3(encoded on LAME) over a CD anyday. I have compressed a 320 down to 128 and noticed a HUGE difference in sound quality than compared the 128 to CD and it sounds the exact same to me.

    It could just be me though, when my friend sends me songs and they are 128 I can notice the poor quality immediatly and I re-download a higher bitrate version(usually 192). When I asked him about the crappy quality he said it sounds great too him.

    I also notice a huge difference between a downloaded 320 and a ripped 320 I do myself with LAME and CDEX. But like I said, my hearing is a tad bit weird.

  9. #39
    Techzonez Governor Super Moderator Conan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    4,040
    Has anyone else tried Nero's MP3Pro encoding? Sounds pretty good to me and the file size is pretty small.

  10. #40
    Titanium Member efc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,184
    Legal discussion on the RIAA supena issue.

    LINK
    Linux Mint Debian Edition

  11. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    81
    I am with you!!!



    regards,


    gicio

  12. #42
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,339
    Originally posted by sociallysleepy
    I have "better than average" hearing and I can say without a shadow of a doubt I'd prefer a 320kbps mp3(encoded on LAME) over a CD anyday. I have compressed a 320 down to 128 and noticed a HUGE difference in sound quality than compared the 128 to CD and it sounds the exact same to me.

    It could just be me though, when my friend sends me songs and they are 128 I can notice the poor quality immediatly and I re-download a higher bitrate version(usually 192). When I asked him about the crappy quality he said it sounds great too him.

    I also notice a huge difference between a downloaded 320 and a ripped 320 I do myself with LAME and CDEX. But like I said, my hearing is a tad bit weird.
    Definitely, you are right. 320 vs 128 bit encoding are different, the more bits/second, the better the sound.. but I think either way, it will not be the same as the original.


    to me, the 320 sound, is more full, less noise etc..
    128 sounds dull and flat.

  13. #43
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,339
    My wife bought a CD two days ago.. I was like what the hell are you doing.

    Found out it was an educational CD produced by Oxford Publishing.. I don't think they are RIAA related.. but I am not sure as I couldn't find out definitely.. I hope not.. bloody bastards... They are the vultures ready to rip the hearts out of the fans that pay their salaries..
    Pure scum.

  14. #44
    Precision Processor Super Moderator egghead's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    In Your Monitor
    Posts
    3,278
    Originally posted by Big Booger
    Definitely, you are right. 320 vs 128 bit encoding are different, the more bits/second, the better the sound.. but I think either way, it will not be the same as the original.


    to me, the 320 sound, is more full, less noise etc..
    128 sounds dull and flat.
    the 128k mp3 encoded file is almost always done with a technique called joint stereo.

    this is done by mixing the left and right sources together and any audio sources that re distinct in left or right speaker get more priority in the encoded process.

    this keeps the stereo speration but you will notice most cymbol sounds willl sound washed out or phased.

    encoding at 160cbr or higher is almost alwaya encoded at true stereo and should not have this problem

    320 cbr is nice quality but it is still constant bit rate and remains the same throughout the recording

    if you have a song with plenty of dynamics the info gets squeezed in this constant rate.

    i preffer variable bit rate at the highest level. this will allow the encoder to use as much bandwidth needed to preserve the sound quality as close to original
    ------------------------------------------------------------



  15. #45
    Gold Member uschie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    west virginia
    Posts
    465
    This whole thread just has me totaly confused.
    You mean there are no 45's????

    Somewhere in Texas , there's a Village missing it's Idiot
    Cheers
    Ushie

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •