PhatNoise Encoding

[Jarv]

Just a quick question really. What type of encoding do most people prefer when ripping their CD's onto the PhatNoise dms?

I've got the Bose system in my car, and as an experiment, I tried mp3 at 192 bit rate, mp3 at 320 bit rate, wma and flac, all of the same CD. I listened to all four types this morning, and couldn't tell the difference between any of them.

That being the case, I'm leaning towards good old mp3 at 192, as it seems to be a good compromise between compression and quality, but before I go for it, has anyone got any comments or advice?

Maybe I should have started a poll.

[Dippy]

I use mp3 at 192 bit rate - seems fine to me (although I'm an old git, so a lower bit rate would probably sound the same to me as well!).

[derdle]

eh? pardon? I used 192bits...but again I'm an old git too and suffer from noise induced deafness (too many rock concerts as a kid). Sounds fine to me.

Somebody is bound to come along and advise using a higher bit rate and then repalcing your cables with 20mm thick super screened gold plated stuff.

Paul

[Jarv]

This is turning out as expected. There's probably a direct correlation between bit rate and being an old bastard.

It's interesting though, you read some of the threads on the phat hack forum, and nothing but exact will do. But there must be so much other background noise in a car that will affect the sound, especially an RS4.

Bring forth the audiophiles!

[derdle]

Jarv to be mathematically correct - it's an inverse proportion...

0.9408 x 10,000/age = the best bit rate for your age.

[Jarv]

Typical accountant, lol.

[nickb834]

Personally I go for 256 for my encodings, it's already a lossy format and when you crank up the volume you can notice that the bass is a little flat and the treble a little harsh if you go lower.

That said, the difference between 256 and 192 is marginal, it's just a nice round number for me