Sep 12, 2006, 08:12 PM
Local time: Sep 12, 2006, 06:12 PM
|
#2 of 35
|
I wasn't talking about lossless formats as the people that share music around here deal in MP3, and they're the same people that claim to be "audiophiles".
What you're talking about is basically saving hard drive space. But quality is a technical thing, isn't it? I find it hard to honestly say that a song that plays at 320 kbps sometimes is better than a song that plays at 320 kbps all the time. That's like saying 100% sometimes is better than 100% all the time: it doesn't make any logical sense. That whole thing about frames was really just extra info, at the end of the day, 100% all the time is better than 100% sometimes, it's logic. Whether you can hear it or not doesn't matter, technically it is better.
But you answered my question, it saves space. I just thought the "audiophiles" around here would go for the best. Thanks.
And odd thing about variable bit rates is that it only seems to be so "variable". I encoded the same song twice at the same variable bitrate and the bitrates repeated the same pattern both times. Interesting.
There's nowhere I can't reach.
Last edited by Trench; Sep 12, 2006 at 08:16 PM.
|