On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:57:41 +0000, Bluechip <csbluechip@gmail.com>
wrote:

>A friend of mine encoded the same (chosen to be complex) track and
>compressed it at everything from 128...320 ...It was his (non-musicians
>(and he knows that)) ear that said "at 160 I personally couldn't her the
>difference, so I went with 192 - the next one up."

Finally! Another rational person regarding bitrates. I should have
figured it would have been you, 'chip :-) There is rampant insanity
out there regarding bitrates. I'll pulled down audio books with the
rate set to 360kbps! Absurd.

I have very good hearing, especially for my age, and I can't tell the
difference in most material at 160kbps. I've also settled on 192kbps
on my computer and 128k for my JBR, the latter being a good compromise
between sound quality and battery life.

Like you said, one has to double-blind test if one is to know for
sure. I like your method. The only thing I'd do different is to have
someone else build the random playlist so that I'd not know anything
about the CD at all.

Along these same lines, I got a new set of PortaPros yesterday. I
have 4 sets that I needed to send back for warranty repair, mostly
cords pulled out from snagging on stuff and I just could not stand
being without any :-)

WOW! I can't believe how much better the new set sound compared to
the older ones. The difference made me go "holy sh*t!". My
next-newest set is probably at least 4 years old. I don't know what
happens over time - maybe the magnets weaken or the diaphragms weaken
or the magnetic field attracts crud or... - but something does.

With the lifetime warranty in effect, I highly recommend anyone with
PortaPros send 'em back for new ones every few years.

John

---
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.johngsbbq.com
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson