|
Title: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: meanmachine73 on June 21, 2006, 11:04:18 AM I saw in the 'rules' of this section that MP3 CD's of concerts should NOT be traded due to the 'poor' quality.. I have quite a few nice concerts (some early shows) which I traded as MP3's tracks on DVD's for the ease of the trade, converted them back to regular CD's for the car etc. I am more than happy with the sound..
Am I missing something here? Please let me know before I start to try and trade with people on here... Cheers.. Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: fieldsy on June 21, 2006, 11:06:37 AM Basically for your own personal use, MP3's are fine for like ipods etc. However if your trading you should always trade in loseless audio, the quality is much better than mp3's.
Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: meanmachine73 on June 21, 2006, 11:13:11 AM Ok, sorry to sound a total lamer here, but as I received MP3 tracks, can I convert them 'back' to lossless audio?
Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: WhatIsItMan on June 21, 2006, 11:21:17 AM Lossless is SO overrated.? ?::) What's wrong with an MP3 ripped at 320 kbps?
Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: Blackrose on June 21, 2006, 12:02:29 PM Lossless is definately not overated. put a genuine lossless recording up against a MP3 at any bit rate on a decent hi-fi system and the difference is astounding, MP3 destroys dynamics and fidelity.
Oviously it depends on the quality of the original recording, for low quality audience recordings it probably does not make much difference, but for better quality sources such as Dankrass' recording of the may 15th show and studio recordings it makes a huge difference. And no once converted to MP3 you can not convert back to lossless effectively as the quality of the recording is lost in the conversion to MP3. And yes MP3's are fantastic for use in car audio systems as it is very difficuclt, if not impossible to get a perfect sound inside a car, then you have vehicle and road noise that interfere with the sound. Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: Mr. Redman on June 21, 2006, 12:23:56 PM Lossless is SO overrated. ::) What's wrong with an MP3 ripped at 320 kbps? Agreed. Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: gnr2006 on June 21, 2006, 02:04:04 PM Lossless is SO overrated. ::) What's wrong with an MP3 ripped at 320 kbps? There are three reasons why people say things like this: 1. They are lazy 2. They have a shitty stereo and have never compared the two on a real system 3. They are too stupid to figure out how to use a .flac file What's your reason? Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: gnr2006 on June 21, 2006, 02:05:14 PM Lossless is SO overrated. ::) What's wrong with an MP3 ripped at 320 kbps? Agreed. An mp3 ripped at 320bps is missing 2-3khz of sound off the top of the wave chart - that's what's fucking wrong with it. I'm so sick of people not understanding this it's so SIMPLE LOSSLESS = EXACT RECORDING LOSSY = LESS THAN EXACT RECORDING why would you want LESS THAN? Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: Steel_Angel on June 21, 2006, 02:07:47 PM people just want to transfer them to their ipod or psp...
Title: Re: A question regarding MP3 traded CD's Post by: nygiants82 on June 21, 2006, 03:29:56 PM I am new to the whole flac thing, so it confuses me when I try to download one flac file, and one song is about 25 MB. Why are the files so much bigger than MP3s?
|