Re: MP3 Vs ATRAC : Which is worse ?

Article View: rec.audio.tech

Article #997

#997

From: Arny Kr�ger
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 00:00

14 lines
1575 bytes

md_fan@usa.net wrote in message <799d94$670$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <77bvje$q3o$3@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk>,
>  kpwong@psy.cuhk.edu.hk (Kit-pui Wong) wrote:


]>I would have asked "which is better" since you can get very good sound from
>both formats.  ATRAC uses a 292k bitrate and most MP3s found on the Net use a
>128k bitrate.  ATRAC is considerably cleaner, especially in the high end.
>When MP3s are encoded at 160k they start sounding pretty good and at 256k
>they get hard to distinguish from ATRAC.


What experiments are these conclusions based on?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <PSXt2.754$ob2.1685@news.flash.net>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <77bvje$q3o$3@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk> <799d94$670$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109f11,8f9482d021558bd9
X-Google-Attributes: gid109f11,public
X-Google-Thread: fb1f8,8f9482d021558bd9
X-Google-Attributes: gidfb1f8,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d85e,8f9482d021558bd9
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d85e,public
X-Google-Thread: 105a81,8f9482d021558bd9
X-Google-Attributes: gid105a81,public
From: "Arny Kr�ger" <arnyk@flash.net>
Subject: Re: MP3 Vs ATRAC : Which is worse ?
Date: 1999/02/03
Message-ID: <PSXt2.754$ob2.1685@news.flash.net>
X-Deja-AN: 440168825
References: <77bvje$q3o$3@justice.csc.cuhk.edu.hk> <799d94$670$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flash.net
X-Trace: news.flash.net 918047279 208.194.219.28 (Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:07:59 CDT)
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:07:59 CDT
Newsgroups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.misc,hk.rec.audio-visual

Reply to Parent Message