[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MP3 vs CD

Subject: Re: MP3 vs CD
From: "Dan Dugan" dandugan_1999
Date: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:29 pm ((PST))
>This is either a
>technical question or a "golden ear" question and not meant to imply
>anything bad about Bernie and his fabulous recordings... is  192kbps
>as good a recording as a CD?  This seems to have been a debate when
>iTunes came out and I haven't really heard much except for speculative
>comments.  What does this group of true audiophiles think about this?
>  Is this discrepancy in quality a myth or fact?

I've done double-blind listening tests. 192K MP3, with a good encoder
(there are some dogs out there), is -very difficult- to distinguish
from CD. That qualifies as good enough in my book, and I keep my
personal entertainment and bird ID libraries in that format.

To put it in perspective, the damage done to a recording by MP3
encoding is an order of magnitude less than dubbing it to analog tape.

-Dan Dugan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU