07/11/2009

So when someone uploads these on the net, should they sound better than the recent cd remasters that have also been uploaded on the net? Well, I’m pretty sure the answer is yes. These usb’s have FLAC 44.1 Khz 24 bit and MP3 320 Kbps files. While I doubt most people have the playback equipment to tell the difference between the FLAC, mp3s and the new CDs — the “lossless” Flac should technically be quite a bit better, because the signal to noise ratio moving from the 16 bit CD to the 24 bit Flac (both 44.1 Khz) is fairly dramatic. While it would have required bigger drives, I wonder why they didn’t do 96 khz 24 bit or something similar?  I guess most experts think the khz don’t matter as much… Anyway, when someone sees these pop up, please let me know.

So when someone uploads these on the net, should they sound better than the recent cd remasters that have also been uploaded on the net?

Well, I’m pretty sure the answer is yes.

These usb’s have FLAC 44.1 Khz 24 bit and MP3 320 Kbps files.

While I doubt most people have the playback equipment to tell the difference between the FLAC, mp3s and the new CDs — the “lossless” Flac should technically be quite a bit better, because the signal to noise ratio moving from the 16 bit CD to the 24 bit Flac (both 44.1 Khz) is fairly dramatic.

While it would have required bigger drives, I wonder why they didn’t do 96 khz 24 bit or something similar?  I guess most experts think the khz don’t matter as much…

Anyway, when someone sees these pop up, please let me know.

Photo posted at 20:10

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus