Bit rates over 192 are a waste of hard drive space

[Séguin]

I keep fucking saying it. Over and over. No body believes me. Most ears (especially us since they've been damaged greatly from loud events) do not bennifet from bit rates over 192.

Here:
Do Higher MP3 Bit Rates Pay Off? - willsmith - Maximum PC

[NinjaBoy]

And the vast majority of people do not have speakers with a frequency range that would actually make a differance.

[.Promoter]

Fuck yeah i dunno 192 is big enough... i can hradly tell 128 and 192 apart, i can tell 96 tho

[scue]

nobody.

benefit.

difference.

hardly.

continue

[mapleleaf4ever]

192, 128, whatever... unless you've got amazing ears and deadly speakers you're not going to tell.

[scue]

128 is quite easily distinguished even on shit speakers.

[Filo]

yeah, but playing anything lower than 320 on a big system is noticeable

[Phrenetic]

apparently 500+ kbps is needed at eventz

[mapleleaf4ever]

320kbps for large systems.

and anything lower is for home use.

Good general rule.

[kir mokum]

this is the first time in the history of recorded music where fidelity is diminishing instead of increasing. we now have a dynamic range of 3 dB and a freq. response of 150-12K.

[FeelGood]

when you're playing them out at a club or on a sound system that is decent 192kbit just doesn't cut it; you have to play 320kbit tracks.

[Chewy]

320 is where its at fooo!!!!

[GuyPoulin]

yeah tracks at 320 do take up a lot of space
but whats the point of buying a track at 192
if you just have to go out and buy that track again @ 320 if you want to play it live....
even downloading it for that matter.

[ebbomega]

Getting sick of Serato DJs playing 192kbps on big systems. It's disgusting. I keep hearing tracks and saying to myself "I have this on vinyl and that's not what it's supposed to sound like". Especially bass-heavy tracks.

Worst culprit I keep hearing: Freeform Five - No More Conversations (Mylo Mix). Those are thick THICK basslines and with just about every serato dj I've seen play it, it clips on the real low ends.

Been hearing the difference between 320s and 192s since the napster days. Fine for most people I guess, but not me.

[dj_soo]

^ i've played the odd 192 in a club situation (some promo's i've received are only in 192) and I find that as long as the source material is good, it's not that bad - especially when compared to someone dropping a 128 file.

Obviously, 320 is preferred though...

Actually, I'm still waiting for Serato to start supporting FLAC or ALAC...

[C_Harrington]

i usually uplaod my mixs in both 320 and 192 so ppl can choose which they want :)

[shift]

Are you fucking kidding? You people must be deaf... I can hear differences even converting my music from wav to 320 kbps.

The top end get's messed with pretty heavily as soon as it's converted, no matter the bit rate. Everything above 16 Khz is gone, and the top end just below that is boosted to compensate, which makes mp3's sound harsher and not as open.

Bass definition is smeared, and the lower you go the worse it gets.

Anything panned in the mix get's really phasey, that sort of underwater sound, and again the lower the bit rate the worse that will sound.

But hey, if you're listen to everything on your computer speakers or ear buds and your Ipod what difference does it make....

[j3rk]

Download the flac and re-encode it into what ever you like. I'm still surprised how few application support flac considering it's an open standard and the libs are open source.

128 sounds like shit with good headphones.

192 vs. 320 i can't noticeably tell, but the onboard sound card might have something to do with that.

[FeelGood]

hard drive space shouldn't be an issue considering you can buy a 500gb hard drive these days for about 165$.

if that doesn't suit you then buy yourself a dvd-r burner for 30$ and a spindle of blank media for 25$ and backup your tunes to dvd-rs.

upgrade yo pc hommie

[esoter1c]

320 or stfu, if you can't tell the difference you're deaf.

[kir mokum]

i buy records.

[Séguin]

Well at least some of you arn't stupid.

Everyone who said they can tell the difference between 192 and 320 is lying to themselfs.

[kir mokum]

well, probably not. i think 192 rolls off the highs at around 16-17K. i can hear in that range and some freaks can hear all the way up to 20K+ still. it's true MOST people can't tell the difference because most people have tried, don't care, and don't even know what "critical listening" means. most people listen to shit pop music via downloads and the radio with a dynamic range of less than 3 dB how are they supposed to know or care about 15K+? most speaker made since the 60s have a freq. response of 40Hz-20KHz +/- 3dB or so, so it's not peoples systems that are limiting them. personally i use 192 on my mp3 player because i don't notice the difference and because i'm not listening to it critically and A/Bing it. if i used CDJs or serato i would want things to be as hi-fi as possible. you don't want the weakest link in your signal path to be right at the begining. but i don't use those formats, so i don't worry about it.

[Séguin]

plus, most sound systems at events are meant for volume, not quality.

[kir mokum]

that's because nightclub owners are idiots and don't want to pay for a decent sound system and/or don't know shit about sound.