IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

mp3 320kbps CBR or VBR?what s better?
takeshibeat
post Sep 30 2011, 11:43
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 25-September 11
Member No.: 93964



hi m new here
i have a hifi system marantz mcr 502 with speakers
on whom i listen to music via usb stick(mp3 320kbps cbr)
all of my music is in flac
i convert the music from flac to mp3 320kbps cbr with foobar2000
i wanted to ask is in my case better to convert the music to mp3 320 kbps cbr or 320kbps vbr?
what s the difference?
if its better to convert it to mp3 320 vbr, can you tell me a few softwares which are good for converting in mp3 320 vbr
is it possible that if i convert an album in mp3 320kbps vbr, that i will get a smaller bitrate than 320kbps??
that s why i thoguht its better to have 320 kbps cbr because thats always 320kbps the same, i thought that if i convert it in vbr 320kbps ,that i could get than a smaller bitrate like 256kbps or ....
and also i don t have in the foobar converting options(converter setup) the ability to convert my music in mp3 320kbps vbr
i just can download the music in mp3 320 cbr

This post has been edited by takeshibeat: Sep 30 2011, 11:52
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
greynol
post Oct 6 2011, 22:40
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



You're arguing that no one can tell the difference between -V0 and 320 and are suggesting ABX tests can be used to prove it.

Ignoring the fact that your claim is patently false (there are people who can routinely spot artifacts in 320kbit mp3 or otherwise in normal music samples, despite how incredible you want us to believe your hearing is), the logic that a failed ABX test (however you try to define what a "failed" ABX test is) can somehow prove it, is fundamentally flawed.

This post has been edited by greynol: Oct 6 2011, 22:49


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Typhoon859
post Oct 13 2011, 11:58
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 19-December 10
Member No.: 86635



QUOTE (greynol @ Oct 6 2011, 16:40) *
You're arguing that no one can tell the difference between -V0 and 320 and are suggesting ABX tests can be used to prove it.

Ignoring the fact that your claim is patently false (there are people who can routinely spot artifacts in 320kbit mp3 or otherwise in normal music samples, despite how incredible you want us to believe your hearing is), the logic that a failed ABX test (however you try to define what a "failed" ABX test is) can somehow prove it, is fundamentally flawed.

Umm, no...

Also, I don't see why you're trying to argue. My point was very simple and just something I wanted to point out. Once again, as I said initially, unless you're looking specifically for the artifacts created by the compressed format, you won't really distinguish it "feel" wise. Yes, with good enough equipment and knowing what you're looking for, you'll hear but probably at worst would mark it off as a difference - nothing significant - maybe slightly unpleasant just being aware of it.

And don't be a douche - "despite how incredible you want us to believe your hearing is". I don't care what you think and I was just trying to help the guy out.

I was trying to say that in most people's cases, it doesn't make much a difference and that he can see for himself if he'd like. Something you should consider trying as well...

QUOTE (sld @ Oct 13 2011, 05:21) *
What he means is that ABX testing is legitimate scientific testing and as such can only disprove phenomena, not prove them. An overwhelming number of Ayes will still be trumped by a single Nay.

Right. Thanks.

This post has been edited by Typhoon859: Oct 13 2011, 12:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st August 2014 - 06:04