Just thought I'd make a list of some of the more aggravating topics for ya
there.
Anyhow to throw my idea into the ring, I got 3 words for you:
Variable
Bitrate
Encoding
is so much of a better idea than fixed bitrate it astounds me that: A) more
people don't do it, and B) more people don't know about it. The idea that
every frame out of a 3-5 minute song would need the same space for each
frame is just stupid. Anyhow, that being said I don't know too much about
the actual process of encoding VBR. I havn't encoded in a long time. I know
Xing makes an encoder, but I've been wary of any Xing based encoder for a
while because they used to suck harshly. However, at the very heart of the
idea, VBR is great. Fixed bitrate will keep cutting music until it fits a
specified size. With a good VBR encoder it would only cut music until there
was nothing more it felt it could cut without affecting the sound quality.
That being said you'll never get all the information you would off a cd, but
I think that part of this argument has been consented too already. The real
question is whether the information you loose is relevant, and attempting to
qualitatively decide that is like attempting to say what is IDM: ie. it's
all relative.
If you like mp3s you like them; if you think they sound bad I wouldn't try
to force you to listen to them. But a percentage (and I believe it's rather
large) of the people on this list actually do like mp3s, and listen to them.
I think most of them still also buy records. So what does it say? Nothing,
because neither works in all cases. Just listen to your music however you
want, and enjoy it.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org