🚀 go-pugleaf

>WRONG, The human ear can only hear so much, and CD's contain
>information that we can't here. So, mp3 at 128kbps 44khz is supposed
>to give you all the audible data you get from a cd (1200kbps). Now if
>you take a 256k 44khz, this means that in theory this will retain
>audible data from a 2400kbps cd sample. 256kbps mp3's are proven by
>experts to be indestinguishable from cd's. So then what happens if you
>have a 384kbps mp3? (if 128 or 256 just isn't isn't good enough for
>your ears).

Do you have documented evidence of this?  There was a statistically correct
test done on AAC (in all of it's modes) vs mp3 128K vs mp2 192K, where mp3
128K was the bottom, followed by mp2 192K and then the different variants of
aac above that.  Full mode aac at 128K was extremely close to statistically
indistinguisable; it got a 4.85+-0.1 on a scale where 5 is reference and 4
is "barely audible artifacts which are not annoying".  Had the score
included 5 in its uncertainty range, it would be considered "statistically
indistinguishable", assuming of course it didn't have a huge uncertainty,
like +-1.  This test was done with expert listeners with quality equipment,
I don't have the url handy, but it's on the mpeg page.

Ken