View Single Post
  #22   Report Post  
Old September 10th 10, 05:34 PM posted to ba.broadcast,alt.radio.digital,rec.radio.shortwave,aus.radio.broadcast,rec.radio.amateur.misc
dave dave is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,185
Default Keefe Bartels investigation into HD Radio picking up steam -LMFAO!!!

John Smith wrote:
On 9/9/2010 8:33 PM, dave wrote:

...
128 sounds very ragged to me. It's fine for the car or background music
but when I put on my Grado headphones the lossy compression is not
really a pleasure to listen to.


This:
"Audio (MP3)
32 kbit/s – MW (AM) quality
96 kbit/s – FM quality - This is questionable since FM broadcast is
transmitted in analog 30hz-15khz. Similarly one cannot compare directly
an LP record to CD using kbit/s.
128–160 kbit/s – Standard Bitrate quality; difference can sometimes be
obvious (e.g. lack of low frequency quality and high frequency "swashy"
effects)[citation needed]
224–320 kbit/s – VBR to highest MP3 quality"

from he
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate

At 225 kbit, it is strange it is so offensive to your ear, it is
approaching concert hall quality ... 96 kbit is ~equal to fm radio ... I
think what your are hearing is more in your mind than anywhere else.

Regards,
JS


I have done blind A/B testing. WAV or FLAC always beats AAC, at any
bitrate. AAC+ SBR, the flavor used for digital radio, is even more
annoying due to false triggering of the pink noise pumper and the total
lack of any sense of space. A typical 78 RPM analog record has more
ambience.

I do all my entertainment radiolistening via web unless I'm somewhere
without wireless broadband or listening to the AM radio. I find the
vast majority of FM radio stations unlistenable due to the extreme
dynamics processing.