>From 6,000 to 12,000 the noise is less smooth. For me it makes the
noise more noticed even though there is none from 12,000 to 20,000
that exsists in the original first 1/2.
I would not consider this file over compressed. This would be my
choice for the amount and type of compression used on a mono mp3 sound
that did not have the real high pitched bugs included with it.
It is bug season in my area of the midwest US and I am off to try some
multichannel bugs tonight. I know I will need an assist on the main
caller I am chasing as I still don't have an ID for him. But he sounds
neat and I found the right spot to record them.
Rich
--- In "1GDW" <> wrote:
> Rich,
> Which frequencies are you referring to when you write "high pitched"?
> Gerald White
>
> --- In "Rich Peet" <>
> wrote:
> > In my comparing of various .mp3 settings I have not found a hiss
> > generated by the mp3 encoding. I do find in some compressions hiss
> > that is more objectionable because there have been more "holes"
> blown
> > into existing hiss during the encode. For example, linked is a less
> > than 10% saturation mono file with the first half being the
> original
> > wave after being converted to 16bit, and the second half being the
> > same sound compressed into a mp3. Compression was 12.6 to 1 or
> 56kbps
> > at a 44.1 khz sample rate with a maximum bandpass of 12,002 cycles.
> > Encode by Fraunhofer IIS done within Adobe Audition. I leave it to
> > your ears if you find the high pitched hiss worse on the 2nd half
> of
> > this recording.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|