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.

On 9/10/10 6:34 PM, dave wrote:
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.

True. The fake stereo does the latter, the SBR guesses the treble at the
hint of a few bits available to steer it.

gr, hwh

"dave" wrote in message
. ..
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.

Have you tried other lossless codecs like Monkey, mp3-HD, Mp4 ALS?

The one that seems most promising is mp3-HD as it's compatible with older
players. I've heard some weird stuff with Money, but it may be me. ALS
sounds solid, but I think you need a player that can handle it.

I think Vorbis has a lossless system as well, but I could be wrong.

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.


Have a look at some of the comments on the 320K AAC experiment from the
listeners.. Remember them;?....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcintern...xtra_high_qual
ity_audio.html
--
Tony Sayer