Do 320kbps mp3 files really sound better? Take the test! Do 320kbp, Maybe unscientific, but interesting results Options

[2Bdecided]

128kbps vs 320kbps samples here:

http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/mp3-so...y-test-128-320/

EDIT: If you want to try the test yourself, DO NOT read on - there are spoilers further down this thread































































The reason I posted it (and the reason it's interesting IMO) is because most people got it "wrong".

43634 votes for 128kbps being better
vs
39578 votes for 320kbps being better

FWIW I thought both sounded like low quality vinyl (a bit muffled, a bit noisy), but the 128kbps version had extra artefacts.


Cheers,
David.

This post has been edited by 2Bdecided: Feb 23 2012, 19:58

[_if]

That test was all right for what it was, but after browsing some other articles, I have to say, that website is truly awful. Everyone should be able to get a good laugh out of this, in which the author complains about the poor quality of MP3s and says the one given in the test of 128 vs 320kbps was a bad example because the "recording has no 'HIGHS'!" (despite a very present hi-hat), and makes some hilariously foolish statements: http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2012/02/sound-...ssed-audio-mp3/

The big kicker is the final paragraph:

Lastly–I have spent hundreds of hours doing tests with HD music and conversion formats and I have noticed something amazing [!!!] I have been able to make a wave file smaller than an mp3 at 128kbs by changing the codec to mpeg layer 3 and 16 bits 44htz stereo and sound identical to the original wave file. Some of the music files were only 3 megabites. Try to do that with an mp3 recorder!"

Impressive.