Anyone else use 320 kbps mp3's?, n00b here. Options

[JAKE196]

Hi, I'm kinda new to compressed audio encoding. . .

My Mp3 player supports mp3, aac, wma, and wav files and after doing a lot of listening to the different lossy formats and bitrates I decided to use 320 mp3's because to my ears they sound almost as good as CD quality, minus the frequency cut off.

I'm just wondering if anyone else here uses 320 kbps mp3's at all?

I've looked at some other threads and a lot of people say that if you are going to use 320 kbps mp3's you might as well use a lossless codec, and I understand that. (however, I use them because my player doesn't support any compressed lossless format)

I've also seen a lot of statements that 320 kbps is a pointless bitrate and something like 256 vbr is the highest thats worth using no matter what. I really don't agree with this, there is definitely an audible difference between 256 CBR or 256 VBR files and 320 files, to my ears anyway. (do I have really good ear's? I'm wondering) I have to admit LAME mp3's can pick up a lot of detail at 256 and 192 kbps, but they still don't sound as good as 320 mp3's.

I usually use 320 kbps mp3's, with the exception of fairly simple songs or exceptionally long songs, for which I use 256 kbps.

Just wanted to express my opinion and see how many other people use them, peace.

So answer the poll if it works. (this is my first post. . . )

I'll check back later.

[Rei Murasame]

I have discovered through experimentation since 2002/3 that a higher bitrate does improve the sound quality, using LAME (all versions) and outboard Hi-fi amp/headphones.
The actual audio is 'closer' to the original CD.
[...]

Being middle age, I cannot hear above 16khz myself and give an HF rolloff at 16k5Hz (it may affect cymbals and other transients)
[...]

So the settings I use are :- (LAME 3.97)
-B 320 -F --lowpass 18.8 --lowpass-width 3 -q 0 --athlower 12

Sorry for reviving this thread, but I just couldn't resist, in light of that muddled-looking commandline. Once upon a time I felt the need to start submitting to ABX tests to see if I could actually find any difference between lossless source and 320kbps LAME.

My hearing is pretty decent, and my listening as well, but over the years I've failed to pass an ABX with LAME 320kbps about 100% of the time (which is why I personally never encode at 320). I'm now 23yrs old. I'd be astonished if you were able to tell the difference between the files you're generating with that 'custom' commandline, versus just using just -b 230 by itself - and that's before we even get into asking if 320kbps is overkill or not.


An ABX I took last month:

CODE

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v0.9.6.6
2009/06/12 08:57:43

File A: J:\[LonE]_Various_Artists_-_CODE_GEASS_Lelouch_of_the_Rebellion_O.S.T._[w_scans]_(FLAC)\[LonE]_Various_Artists_-_CODE_GEASS_Lelouch_of_the_Rebellion_O.S.T._[w_scans]_(FLAC)\02 Stories.flac
File B: J:\[Nipponsei]_Code_Geass_Hangyaku_no_Lelouch_Original_Soundtrack\02 - Stories.mp3

08:57:43 : Test started.
09:01:59 : 00/01 100.0%
09:02:39 : 00/02 100.0%
09:04:27 : 01/03 87.5%
09:06:57 : 01/04 93.8%
09:09:49 : 02/05 81.3%
09:11:55 : 02/06 89.1%
09:14:23 : 02/07 93.8%
09:15:04 : 03/08 85.5%
09:15:43 : 04/09 74.6%
09:16:27 : 05/10 62.3%
09:17:22 : 06/11 50.0%
09:18:18 : 06/12 61.3%
09:21:59 : 06/13 70.9%
09:22:19 : 07/14 60.5%
09:23:00 : 07/15 69.6%
09:23:31 : 08/16 59.8%
09:24:30 : 09/17 50.0%
13:37:01 : 09/18 59.3%
13:37:57 : 10/19 50.0%
13:39:59 : 11/20 41.2%
13:41:35 : 11/21 50.0%
13:42:36 : 11/22 58.4%
13:44:19 : 12/23 50.0%
13:45:34 : 12/24 58.1%
13:48:39 : 13/25 50.0%
13:51:42 : 14/26 42.3%
13:53:30 : 14/27 50.0%
13:54:19 : 15/28 42.5%
13:55:49 : 15/29 50.0%
13:57:43 : 16/30 42.8%
13:58:29 : 16/31 50.0%
13:59:18 : 16/32 57.0%
14:00:10 : 17/33 50.0%
14:00:50 : 17/34 56.8%
14:02:24 : 17/35 63.2%
14:05:34 : 17/36 69.1%
14:08:54 : 18/37 62.9%
14:09:57 : 19/38 56.4%
14:11:58 : 20/39 50.0%
14:13:09 : 21/40 43.7%
14:14:05 : 22/41 37.8%
14:15:17 : 22/42 43.9%
14:16:24 : 23/43 38.0%
14:17:20 : 23/44 44.0%
14:21:05 : 23/45 50.0%
14:23:18 : 24/46 44.1%
14:24:00 : 24/47 50.0%
14:26:05 : 25/48 44.3%
14:26:26 : 26/49 38.8%
14:26:49 : 26/50 44.4%
14:27:41 : 26/51 50.0%
14:29:36 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 26/51 (50.0%)

A 7 hour ABX test of FLAC versus LAME CBR320, which as you can see, I failed spectacularly. You claimed that a high bitrate like that is 'closer' to the original, but I think that it's actually transparent.

Can you show me any ABX test you've taken where you've actually detected a difference?

This post has been edited by Rei Murasame: Jul 3 2009, 21:01

[/mnt]

Can you show me any ABX test you've taken where you've actually detected a difference?

Here's a list of samples that i've successfully ABXed at 320kbps CBR:

PTP - Show Me Your Spine [sample] (dance club track from Robocop)
Welcome To Drexciya [sample]
Skinny Puppy - Human Disease [sample]
eig sample (no ABX log, but almost anyone can ABX this at 320)

This post has been edited by /mnt: Jul 3 2009, 23:00