[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] Soundcard/iTunes phollies
Hi Dave:
What do you mean by "much better results"? I'm curious.
I've had very bad experiences with LAME on any of my PC's. It's slow, deadly slow and the MP3 files
don't sound any better to my ears than just letting iTunes do the work. Sometimes LAME produces a
little bit smaller file, not sure why. I used to MusicMatch to do the ripping but iTunes is just as
fast and takes care of putting into the library and my iPod. MP3 saved out of Sony Soundforge seem
to sound just fine but for some reason are always larger file size for the same bitrate than iTunes
or MusicMatch. I can't understand that since all three use the official German codec as far as I
know.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Nolan" <davenolanaudio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Soundcard/iTunes phollies
Eric -
Just wondering where you might have heard these "anecdotes" about WMP vs.
iTunes?
Is there any good resource/online discussion about different MP3 encoding
techniques / players / etc... that you've found to have a good "signal-to-
noise ratio"?
I've done minimal testing comparison of encoders for Mac, and am currently
using Peak with LameLib (much better results @ 128kbps stereo on my intel
Mac than iTunes)...
dave nolan
92nd St. Y
NYC
I've not tested this hypothesis to a great extent, but anecdotally it
seems that iTunes is much less efficient at handling VBR encoded MP3s
than Fixed Bit Rate MP3s, whereas WMP seems to handle VBR and FBR MP3s
equally well.
Anyone else notice similar VBR/FBR difference between iTunes and WMP?
Eric Jacobs
The Audio Archive
tel: 408.221.2128
fax: 408.549.9867
mailto:EricJ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx