CBR vs VBR
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
So I've heard that 320kbps can actually add artifacts to the music, while Variable Bitrate (V0) is optimized for to closely match the source.
But I've also heard that V0 may lack some frequencies and sound worse.
Settle this once and for all and tell me the truth /g/.
I don't know how is it with other encoding tools, but v0 encoded with lame preserves all frequencies from the lossless source, where 320 cuts them to about D#.
Not that it makes any difference when a normal adult can hear only up to about C or C#.
>>51977798
The media you store your mp3s on is more important. Yes, V0 is afffected less by rotational velocidensity than 320, but it's not immune.
MEMES
>mp3
deprecated
OGG
G
G
>85mb for a 320kbps CBR mp3 file
>>51977798
>MP3
How about using a lossy codec than doesn't suck?
Even then, why don't you just have all of your music in a lossless format?
flac/opus
master
race
>>51978685
That's for 36 minutes of audio y'know
>>51977798
>So I've heard that 320kbps can actually add artifacts to the music
true
>while Variable Bitrate (V0) is optimized for to closely match the source.
true
>But I've also heard that V0 may lack some frequencies and sound worse.
true
