Dubstepforum.com

wolf89 wrote:mp3 is redundant really. Why bother in this day and age. I avoid it at all costs outside of putting music on my phone

the extra time taken to download/ more memory taken up isnt worth the tiny improvemnet in quality for me atm

MP3s are brilliant for phones and shit, most people aren't using some £1500 audiophile headphones with a headphone amp on the bus or whatever anyway

MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

skimpi wrote:MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

Convert Mp3 to WAV then back to Mp3 to give the sound quality a little boost too

skimpi wrote:MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

Yeah we did the same test. 320 / WAV felt like guessing, 128 / WAV was quite easy actually.
Still, its surprising if you listen to all the data it looses. Seems like half the song

just the top half

skimpi wrote:MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

If you can't hear the difference between 128 and 320kbps mp3 files you're either deaf or using the speaker on a phone for comparison. Even then I'm sure I could tell on account of 128kbps being noisy as fuck.

wolf, what do you recommend? FLAC/WAV?

Not talking physical things here, digital only, obviously vinyl has the best warm sound.

wolf89 wrote:

skimpi wrote:MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

If you can't hear the difference between 128 and 320kbps mp3 files you're either deaf or using the speaker on a phone for comparison. Even then I'm sure I could tell on account of 128kbps being noisy as fuck.

sorry m8 we're not all music snobs

wolf89 wrote:
If you can't hear the difference between 128 and 320kbps mp3 files you're either deaf or using the speaker on a phone for comparison. Even then I'm sure I could tell on account of 128kbps being noisy as fuck.

edit i mean : This ^

tbh, any time i've heard anything less than a 320 being played in a club, it has sounded pretty bad, even tunes bought off iTunes sounds a bit worse, but maybe it's placebo??

Yeah I'll go for FLAC on account of it being significantly smaller files without loss. However some shit doesn't like FLAC (iTunes). So take that into account.

If just ripping cds I use mp3 as I have the originals anyway though and I'm putting them on my phone most likely. Never go under 320kbps ever for any purpose. Only deal with that with shit like datpiff or streaming things

mason666 wrote:

wolf89 wrote:

skimpi wrote:MP3 all the way, no one can tell and i mean NO ONE, at uni this one guy thought he could fucking tell the differnece between like 128 and wavs and he couldnt, I got most of them right, but still 320 no one can tell! 320 is the future.

Fuck making storage bigger, make MP3s better!

If you can't hear the difference between 128 and 320kbps mp3 files you're either deaf or using the speaker on a phone for comparison. Even then I'm sure I could tell on account of 128kbps being noisy as fuck.

sorry m8 we're not all music snobs

Why choose lower quality on purpose if you have the option?

nobody wrote:tbh, any time i've heard anything less than a 320 being played in a club, it has sounded pretty bad, even tunes bought off iTunes sounds a bit worse, but maybe it's placebo??

maybe, i played a few 256 tunes before and haven't really noticed the difference, even though on headphones they sound slightly 'dull' in the high-end imo.
tiny difference though really.

@wolf i wouldnt choose 128 over 320 but i choose 320 over wav for the reasons i said earlier

The extra time? Like 20 seconds more? it's not like you have to sit there and watch downloads either you nob.

what about storage?

that's the main issue for me

u nob

chris your retartet

storage isn't a valid argument anymore TBH IMO, as i said in the first post

mason666 wrote:what about storage?

that's the main issue for me

u nob

Stop using 15 year old computers you pleb