🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <F6LBJt.xB@research.att.com>, jj@research.att.com (jj, curmudgeon
and tiring philalethist) wrote:

> In article <799d94$670$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,  <md_fan@usa.net> wrote:
> >But the formats are intended for different purposes.  You can record almost
> >any source on a MiniDisc (including MP3s) but MP3s themselves are just a file
> >format.  Why not just use both?
>
> Why not use MPEG-2 AAC, which is a new standard that provides, according
> to properly executed DBT's, better performance at 96kb/s than MP3 does
> at 128kb/s, and that has a performance at 128kb/s that is has a higher
> mean than AC3 at 192 kb/s (not that AC3 is bad at that bitrate, please).
> (To be clear, the AAC 128 and AC3 192 are NOT statistically distinguishable
> to 5%)

If you're talking about VQF (and its cousins) I have to disagree, based on my
listening tests with VQF at least.  The highs are very good at 96kb but the
bass lacks fullness and the soundstage has a narrowness to it.  I base those
opinions on tests with Winamp's VQF plugin and the K-jofol player with about
10 different files.  MP3s sound a lot better to me in the low end and with
stereo separation.

Anyhow, my original point was that MD/ATRAC is an entire recording medium and
the others are just file formats.  You can use both of them together with MD.

MDF

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own