128Kbps > 320Kbps MP3 Is it possible for a 128Kbps LAME MP3 file to sound BETTER than one encoded at 256Kbps? I didn't think so until I listened to a copy of Third Eye Blind - How's It Gonna Be at 128Kbps vs 256Kbps. I probably can't explain or describe it accurately, but the 256Kbps audio was brighter and louder... with more pronounced BASS from the subwoofer with possible distortion. The smaller 128Kbps audio was softer with LESS bass... remaining clear yet vivid with no discernible audio compression loss? Probably factors on other things too like; the encoder used, if the sources were the same for extraction, speakers, sound card...ect. First time in a long time I preferred a lower bitrate over say 256Kbps or even 320Kbps.
Remember that cool hidden "Graffiti Wall" here on BBR? After the name change I became the "owner", so to speak as it became: Dustyn's Wall »[Serious] RIP
mjhouserAddress is approximatePremium
I don't remember the name, but I thought 5 or 6 years ago, that a LAME encoder was out that was "high performance" or "PRO" and made better quality MP3s at a lower bit rate.
I think it was and add-on to another program.
Crash GordonDrive It Like You Stole ItReviews:
reply to Dustyn
I've had lower bit-rate tunes that sounded just as good as higher ones. I even ran them through my main Yamaha receiver just to "really" check the sound quality. That was years ago and I've pretty much replaced all my lower bit-rate ones with either 256 VBR or 320 CBR ones.
Mary Esther, FL
Fraunhauffer codec, and it's free.
totamakAnd they call me nuts?
Los Angeles, CA
reply to Dustyn
What you are likely hearing is dynamic range compression (DRC) rearing it's ugly head. DRC is the problem issue that the "Loudness War" is all about. In short, DRC is the function of raising the overall apparent volume level of the music so it sounds louder at a given position by squeezing the quieter parts and louder parts closer together.
All mastered music has some level of DRC applied, even those from 40+ years ago. However it has gone way out of control in recent years, making for stuff that is fatiguing to listen to.
If both rip versions were from the same source, then what happened is whoever did the 256 Kbps encode used a software DRC function (a lot of encoding tools include a DRC function). That's why assuming the same source, the 256 Kbps doesn't sound as good though it's louder and has twice the bit rate. The DRC made the music less appealing to listen to. I ran across this frequently with downloaded MP3s where a higher bit rate version seems to be inferior to a lower bit rate version.
DRC is killing modern music.