Guest Dexium Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Look, I know there must be a perfectly good reason for setting the bitrate at 96, I'm just not quite sure as to what that reason is. I'd love to hear these tracks at at least 128.. I miss the crispness. (and so does my possible contest entry - I don't think I'll bother putting it up because the 96 rip of it makes me cringe ) Are you on a server with a transfer amount cap, thus you can't afford the extra meg or so per file? Or is it 96 is useful for streaming listens... I just can't work it out... help me out here.. Thanks - Dexium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soem aeld Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 I'm going to upload my track somewhere else as a 160kBps mp3.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shpongled Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Everybody can hear if it's a good track or not with 96 kbit. It takes less space and is faster to download.... you know there are over 100 tracks. If you are one of the winners and this compilation is released then you can/have to send the original wav file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Children Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 Urrrgh indeed I already explained that ... briefly : 1) permits people with low bandwidth to dload more tracks 2) permits Inpsyde Media not to be afraid to release the future comp of winner tracks (-> "permits winners to be released by a label & become known in the scene via future DJ sets with their track & eventual bookings") as nobody will have the normal quality version of these tracks 3) takes less place on Aquagena's server Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Children Posted March 19, 2002 Share Posted March 19, 2002 I also think 96 Kbps stereo is enough to have an opinion about a track (good/average/bad) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Clargoa Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 I hope all tracks will truly be at 96kbps, the ones that are not should be disqualified, right? That would only be fair. If some track is at 128kbps or higher, it's clearly an advantage. And you can get ok-quality at 96kbps, try different encoders. LAME couldn't compress my song at 96kbps properly(although it sounded great at 192kbps). I tried it with all settings but it distorted some hihats really bad. The older Fraunhofer-codec(Radium version) works best with low bitrates or at least with my song it did. It didn't distort hihats and the overall quality was ok(but hardly a pleasure to listen though). So try different encoders to get the best results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soem aeld Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 LAME made some VBR thingie on my track.. don't disqualify it for that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Clargoa Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 Soem Aeld, you can change the settings of LAME, it has many different variable bit rate(VBR) modes and you can disable it too(to get the exact bit rate, the same bitrate throughout the song). But if the bitrates are below 100kbps I don't think it matters. I haven't tested if you can better results using VBR with really low bitrates though but I suppose it doesn't help much. Maybe someone knows better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Children Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 Well VBR won't be disqualified, but, in case of there is an hesitation between a VBR and a NON-VBR track (ex : VBR ranked 19th, NON-VBR ranked 20th) then the NON-VBR will be the winner one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts