Re: Re(2): Re(2): TI-H: MP3s

To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: Re(2): Re(2): TI-H: MP3s
From: gussie@alaska.net (Grant Stockly)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:39:57 -0700
Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org


>From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>
>
>[about mp3's]
>>It isn't the music, but the quality...
>>
>>4 minute CD track:
>>*~55MB in CD format
>>*~4.5MB in MP3 format
>
>Hardly matters when my music is on CD anyway.  I don't store
>music on my computer.

I can fit 250 MP3s on a CD...  :)  thats 14 hours of music...  :)

>
>>and most of all, you can hardly reliaze any decrease in quality!
>
>
>I can hear it on my speakers, and on my cousins Marantz and Snell
>equipment it is obvious (still sounds pretty good, but not nearly as
>nice as the CD).
>
>Ever mp3 encode a pink noise sample?  Try it.  Listen to the result,
>then listen closely to an MP3 on good equipment, you should be
>able to hear similarities (I can anyway, I was successfully able to
>distinguish between CD and MP3 in blind testing on my homebuilt
>speakers (using Viva mids and tweets and 18" subs), most of the
>time anyway).  I'm not saying MP3 isn't good quality, just that it
>does
>sound significantly different then the CD version.
>
>I'm all for more compact storage, my entire CD collection (~150)
>would fit into just about 10GB if MP3 encoded.  Drop a bunch of the
>songs I don't like and I could fit it all onto one 9GB drive.
>If I had an extra monitor and sound card, I'd consider setting up my
>extra computer to replace my CD player.  But I don't, so I don't
>bother collecting MP3's. (I do have an 800mb graphics library tho...:)
>
>DK