Quality Of Mp3 -> Mpc Trascode
Reply #13 – 2002-09-10 14:01:29
I know enough to make a decision myself apart from the quality issue. (...) What is your objective opinion about the audio quality of a 192 kbps mp3 trascoded to a mpc --std based on your experience and not vague theoretical ideas ? My purpose isn't to answer your question. Just a few thing about size. I tried to compare the size of a mpc file, encoded from original, the mpc file, reencoded from a 192@basic-LAME file, and the mp3 himself.Johann Sebastian Bach - Concerto for violin BWV 1042 - 1. Allegro mp3 : 10 034 ko (192 kb/s) mpc : 10 512 ko (195 kb/s) mp3=> mpc : 10458 (194 kb/s)transcoded mpc is bigger than mp3 CBR file - quality is theoricaly lower than mpc original file AND mp3 file (but you know it). Benefit : 0 Red Hot Chili Peppers - Blood Sugar Sex magic - 1. The Power of Equality mp3 : 5707 ko (192 kb/s) mpc : 5678 ko (191 kb/s) mp3=>mpc : 5685 (191 kb/s)File size are the same - quality is lower (theory) Metallica - Metallica - 1. Enter Sandman mp3 : 7788 ko (192 kb/s) mpc : 6912 ko (170 kb/s) mp3=>mpc : 7124 (175 kb/s)In that case, you will gain space by reencoding. But you can see that the mpc file directly encoded from the CD is smaller than the re-encoded mpc file ENCODER USED : mppenc 1.1 - LAME 3.91 (P.Pawlowski WA plug-in) DECODER USER : WA Diskwriter. Bitrate CALCULATION : Encspot2 I can not say anything about quality without a real ABX test. With a fast test with winamp, The Metallica song seems to be degraded compared to original song - normal.