Is 200+ Kbps of LP Nirvana the Key to Audio Ecstasy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter franznietzsche
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the quality of audio files, particularly MP3s, and the ability to discern differences in bitrates. Users share experiences with encoding music, noting that while some can easily tell the difference between lower bitrates (like 128 kbps and 64 kbps), others argue that the difference becomes negligible at higher bitrates (256 kbps and above). The impact of headphone quality on audio perception is emphasized, with many agreeing that good headphones can reveal distinctions that standard earbuds cannot. The conversation also touches on the convenience of using iTunes for music despite a general dislike for MP3 sound quality. Additionally, there's a humorous exchange about a user's collection of Nirvana LPs and the absurdity of posthumous releases, showcasing a light-hearted tone amidst the technical discussion.
franznietzsche
Messages
1,503
Reaction score
6
Mmmm, audio ecstasy.

Guy on my dorm network had fifteen Nirvana LPs all encoded as 200+KBps MP3s. Just put them all on my ipod. They sound so wonderful. Whoever that guy was, he's my hero.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yeah, the guy probably actually had 64 and changed it to 200 so people think it's high quality. Meanwhile, no one can tell.

I seen big music fans and they couldn't tell from 128 and 64.
 
JasonRox said:
I seen big music fans and they couldn't tell from 128 and 64.

I can easily tell :bugeye: Then again, I do have Sennheiser HD 590s
 
JasonRox said:
Yeah, the guy probably actually had 64 and changed it to 200 so people think it's high quality. Meanwhile, no one can tell.

I seen big music fans and they couldn't tell from 128 and 64.

Anyone could hear the difference between 128 kbps and 64 kbps mp3 on laptop speakers. I can easily tell the difference between 192 kbps and 128 kbps, too, given the same encoder. 256+ kbps vs. 192 kbps, however, is sometimes a coin flip. 300 kbps mp3 is generally regarded as being acoustically indistinguishable from CD-DA.

- Warren
 
JasonRox said:
Yeah, the guy probably actually had 64 and changed it to 200 so people think it's high quality. Meanwhile, no one can tell.

I seen big music fans and they couldn't tell from 128 and 64.



Ummm...i certainly can.

I usually encode my CDs in Ogg 200+. I can definitely tell a difference between those and say iTunes AAC at 128. Likewise, i have some of the itunes versions of these same recordings. Definitely a difference. I checked the bit rate AFTER noticing the difference. Going above 200+ i can't tell the difference any more but from 128 to 200+ I certainly can.
 
I guess the earphone quality has a huge impact. With earphones, I can't tell at all.
 
JasonRox said:
I guess the earphone quality has a huge impact. With earphones, I can't tell at all.

What kind of earphones are you using?

- Warren
 
yea depends on the quality of the speaker... I doubt you could tell with ipod earphones (or most of those tiny earphone deals)... but with good quality headphones or speakers anyone should be able to tell 128 from 192.

I hate the sound of mp3s but it's what I listen to 99% of the time because itunes is just so damn convenient. I have 10.7 days worth of music on my computer hd, that couldn't fit as aiff... well it could, but I wouldn't have enough space left.
 
moe darklight said:
yea depends on the quality of the speaker... I doubt you could tell with ipod earphones (or most of those tiny earphone deals)... but with good quality headphones or speakers anyone should be able to tell 128 from 192.

I hate the sound of mp3s but it's what I listen to 99% of the time because itunes is just so damn convenient. I have 10.7 days worth of music on my computer hd, that couldn't fit as aiff... well it could, but I wouldn't have enough space left.

iTunes doesn't sell MP3s...

i have approx 3000 tracks on my HD, about half MP3, nearly half Ogg, and a small portion of AAC.
 
  • #10
I have 220 gigabytes of music (45+ days), all mp3, all 192 kbps or better.

- Warren
 
  • #11
well I rip the album from the original CD's to 192 (320 if it's a CD that deserves good quality). from the itunes store I've only bought a McLusky album and a Parry Gripp album. also a lot of it is downloaded and I'm slowly buying the music I like as I get $$
 
  • #12
franznietzsche said:
Guy on my dorm network had fifteen Nirvana LPs


15!? :bugeye: ... is Kurt Cobain pulling a 2pac and I wasn't aware of it??
 
  • #13
moe darklight said:
15!? :bugeye: ... is Kurt Cobain pulling a 2pac and I wasn't aware of it??

Some were singles with the same songs as some of the albums.

Going down the list i have:

All Apologies [Single]
Bleach
Come As You Are [Single]
From The Muddy Banks of the Wishkah
Heart-Shaped Box [Single]
Hormoaning
In Bloom [Single]
In Utero
Incesticide
Litium [CD Single] --Obviously not the LP versions...
MTV Unplugged in new York
Nevermind
Nirvana
Rome 02/22/94 (Concert)
Smells Like Teen Spirit [Single]

All of the singles are labeled as LP versions, the albums aren't labelled as such. All are at 200+ bit rates though.

And actually yeah there have been a couple of posthumous albums, but not as many as Tupac.
 
  • #14
franznietzsche said:
but not as many as Tupac.

lol yea... I think Miss Cleo is channeling that one or something.





one of my favorite Chappelle skits, I was laughing so hard I could barely breathe when it came on tv.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Anyone want to buy my FIRST PRESSING of 'Bleach'?
Well, you can't have it!
 
  • #16
lmao, YOU again! ... what's next, you got a bag-full of the last remains of Billy Corgan's hair in your basement?


——————
Moe "The 80's weren't cool and the Pixies invented the 90's" Darklight :biggrin:
 
  • #17
Chi Meson said:
...
Well, you can't have it!
Yes, because some people know they can't have it, so they refuse to make any deals with it. Some people like not to because they just don't care or learn not to care.
Honestly, I wish all the best for it, and one day there'll be someone buying it for you.
 
  • #18
moe darklight said:
lmao, YOU again! ... what's next, you got a bag-full of the last remains of Billy Corgan's hair in your basement?


——————
Moe "The 80's weren't cool and the Pixies invented the 90's" Darklight :biggrin:

Billy lost his hair when they added fake violins to their music. I never collected hair, much. Got a fistful of Jello's chest hair once while he was diving into the audience. I didn't keep it.

blogger1 said:
Yes, because some people know they can't have it, so they refuse to make any deals with it. Some people like not to because they just don't care or learn not to care.
Honestly, I wish all the best for it, and one day there'll be someone buying it for you.
You really do want it don't you?:-p
 
  • #19
haha, that explains it.

whatever it is that possesses people to add fake violins into their music, I'll never understand...
 
Back
Top