[LAU] What is the best MP3 encoder?

[Len Ovens]

On Tue, April 2, 2013 7:06 pm, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 18:16 -0700, Len Ovens wrote:

>> RME has no choice really. If they want their gear to be used to make
>> bluray sound tracks, they have to support 192k. This is the
>> certification
>> needed by equipment for that use. True, the sound is not any better than
>> if the studio used 48k and resampled the finished product to 192k (maybe
>> worse). but this is not about sound quality or RME doing marketing... it
>> is Hollywood doing the marketing...
>
> People are convinced it does sound better,

"People" are convinced of many things. The list is rather long and
probably includes most of what is wrong in this world these days... or for
the past 10000 years for that matter. (the 10000 number is drawn from thin
air and is in no way related to any understanding I have of our species
origin)


> http://forum.dvdtalk.com/hd-talk/578983-more-96-192khz-blurays-please.html
> , I don't think they are all wrong. Perhaps the players really do sound
> better at 192 KHz, because of better matching filters or what ever, just

I believe the new DVDs include other audio differences besides just sample
rate/depth. Multi-channel (surround) for one.. combining that to stereo
would have some sonic difference as well even if A/Bing on stereo only.
Setting the Bluray players up to play blueray disks 1 or 2 db louder would
be enough to make them sound better... Just remixing for surround is a
remix and the mix will probably be "just different". That difference is
"Fresh" and new to the listener. People who buy a new system also have a
new set of speakers generally, to handle the extra channels if nothing
else. Too many new/different things for a good test.

Testing using a blueray player would not be the way to go, rather testing
each of the different tech changes from one to the other with known
program material at known levels.


-- 
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net