i use 92 or 96kb\s to save space
Zimmer! Home now? And that is probably why you have such crap music qualityZimmer wrote:
Well that fucks me up then. I have shit music quality.leetkyle wrote:
For general media through headphones and speakers etc - anything between 192kb/s and 320kb/s should be fine!
PCM is just Pulse Code Modulation (I had to make a PCM circuit back when I was at uni to transmit audio over an infrared link). Just an uncompressed digital representation of an analog signal. It can be better than DD/DTS but not always.heggs wrote:
And to further this discussion a bit: PCM uncompressed is the best format you can hope to get. This is only achievable through HDMI I believe. PCM basically encompasses the HD versions of Dolby Digital and DTS, which I think have yet to be utilized by any movies.Bertster7 wrote:
You can tell the difference with those audio qualities though.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
320kbps is more than enough - like everyone else, I can't remember exactly what CD bitrate is, but it's less than or equal to 320kbps.
DTS audio (upto 1500kbps) sounds better than AC3 (448kbps) - but only very slightly (better audio range, especially for LFE). But the fact that the difference between the two is only very slight is mostly accounted for because AC3 utilises more sophisticated compression techniques.
I'm quite fussy and like to get all my films in DTS. I've got a fair bit of music in DTS format too - but it's overkill really (even if you can just about tell the difference).
(I know we're talking about music not films - but it's the same principle, high bitrate audio formats)
As a basic rule of thumb:
PCM > DTS > DD
Although Dolby claims that they compress more efficiently, I've watched the same movie in both formats, and DTS sounded better. I'm a bit of an audio snob too Bertster7, and try to get the maximum performance out of my system.
PCM can be used over virtually any medium, provided the bandwidth is sufficient for the type of PCM content being delivered. I don't use PCM, because I transmit the still encoded data to my external decoder (either on my Z-5400s or on my digital amp), I can't see how it could improve anything.
Dolby do compress better, hence the bitrate being 3x lower. DTS doesn't sound 3x better than DD - but the people who say they can't tell the difference must be verging on deaf - it sounds distinctly better quality.
While we're on the topic: Why is downloaded iTunes music 128 kb/s? You would think they would at least make it 192...
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
iTunes -> iPod -> iBoughtThisMP3PlayerBecauseHeDidToo (or, iTunes is a part of iPod, and most iPod owners are jumping on the MP3 bandwagon and really dont know shit about quality)haffeysucks wrote:
While we're on the topic: Why is downloaded iTunes music 128 kb/s? You would think they would at least make it 192...
Oh, okay, thanks for the help. I'll try that.SargeV1.4 wrote:
iTunes -> iPod -> iBoughtThisMP3PlayerBecauseHeDidToo (or, iTunes is a part of iPod, and most iPod owners are jumping on the MP3 bandwagon and really dont know shit about quality)haffeysucks wrote:
While we're on the topic: Why is downloaded iTunes music 128 kb/s? You would think they would at least make it 192...
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
Winamp ftw!
iTunes is for iPod, and through shitty iPod headphones you cannot notice the quality. 128 suits just fine.haffeysucks wrote:
Oh, okay, thanks for the help. I'll try that.SargeV1.4 wrote:
iTunes -> iPod -> iBoughtThisMP3PlayerBecauseHeDidToo (or, iTunes is a part of iPod, and most iPod owners are jumping on the MP3 bandwagon and really dont know shit about quality)haffeysucks wrote:
While we're on the topic: Why is downloaded iTunes music 128 kb/s? You would think they would at least make it 192...
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
Damn straight.leetkyle wrote:
Winamp ftw!
Although I was pissed off with it recently. It wouldn't play m4a files without a plugin that required Quicktime. I don't like Quicktime, so I just played them through BSPlayer so I could use FFDshow to do it instead - it's lame that Winamp couldn't use that to play an audio file.
QFE.leetkyle wrote:
Winamp ftw!
Better for syncing an ipod than itunes imo
Eh, iTunes has never wronged me since I used it from iTunes 1.0...
I'm not knocking what you use, I just don't like having a "store" shoved in my face.Hurricane wrote:
Eh, iTunes has never wronged me since I used it from iTunes 1.0...
i don't use itunes for anything on my PSP but when i do i use 128kbps otherwise i use 25% QVBR on WMA 10 Pro and the CD Bitrate is 1411kbps because it is uncompressed in wav and the MP3 equivalent is 256kbps AAC i don't know WMA 9.2 is 192kbps WMA 10 Pro is 80kbps from personal expierence
As I understand it, from reading around a bit (and mostly concerning my PS3 to my Onkyo receiver; my dvd player is going through component and digital coax, so it is sending DD and DTS directly to the receiver for decoding), unless you're receiver is capable of decoding DTS-MA or DD TrueHD, then you're better off sending audio over PCM than Bitstream. However, if I were to all of a sudden get a receiver that was HDMI 1.3 and capable of decoding DTS-MA and DD TrueHD, then I would switch it over to bitstream.Bertster7 wrote:
PCM is just Pulse Code Modulation (I had to make a PCM circuit back when I was at uni to transmit audio over an infrared link). Just an uncompressed digital representation of an analog signal. It can be better than DD/DTS but not always.
PCM can be used over virtually any medium, provided the bandwidth is sufficient for the type of PCM content being delivered. I don't use PCM, because I transmit the still encoded data to my external decoder (either on my Z-5400s or on my digital amp), I can't see how it could improve anything.
Dolby do compress better, hence the bitrate being 3x lower. DTS doesn't sound 3x better than DD - but the people who say they can't tell the difference must be verging on deaf - it sounds distinctly better quality.
Just so you know where I'm getting my information from:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Jc … &gl=us
http://www.meridian-audio.com/ara/bitstrea.htm read the conclusion section specifically.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=770354
I should have been a bit more clear I suppose.
Remember Me As A Time Of Day
mtb0minime wrote:
I'd stick with 192. At first I couldn't really tell the difference between 192 and 128, but it's very obvious after a while. Especially when playing music loud, whether it's on headphones or on regular speakers.
But 1014 is just overkill.
Bose headphones ftw! I'd go 320, i have Bose On-Ear headphones and you can get a lot out of them. I remember trying the tri-port phones out at the store and they seemed similar.
I do everything at 192, unless I'm putting it on my phone as a ringtone then I crank the quality down as it's just shitty mono speaker on that.
If the decoder you are sending stuff to isn't capable of decoding the bitstream you send it, of course PCM is better - because a encoded bitstream the decoder can't decode isn't going to produce good sound - if it produces any sound at all.heggs wrote:
As I understand it, from reading around a bit (and mostly concerning my PS3 to my Onkyo receiver; my dvd player is going through component and digital coax, so it is sending DD and DTS directly to the receiver for decoding), unless you're receiver is capable of decoding DTS-MA or DD TrueHD, then you're better off sending audio over PCM than Bitstream. However, if I were to all of a sudden get a receiver that was HDMI 1.3 and capable of decoding DTS-MA and DD TrueHD, then I would switch it over to bitstream.Bertster7 wrote:
PCM is just Pulse Code Modulation (I had to make a PCM circuit back when I was at uni to transmit audio over an infrared link). Just an uncompressed digital representation of an analog signal. It can be better than DD/DTS but not always.
PCM can be used over virtually any medium, provided the bandwidth is sufficient for the type of PCM content being delivered. I don't use PCM, because I transmit the still encoded data to my external decoder (either on my Z-5400s or on my digital amp), I can't see how it could improve anything.
Dolby do compress better, hence the bitrate being 3x lower. DTS doesn't sound 3x better than DD - but the people who say they can't tell the difference must be verging on deaf - it sounds distinctly better quality.
Just so you know where I'm getting my information from:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Jc … &gl=us
http://www.meridian-audio.com/ara/bitstrea.htm read the conclusion section specifically.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=770354
I should have been a bit more clear I suppose.
If you have external hardware capable of decoding the audio signal you are sending to it, then bitstream is better (though pretty much the same).