(at least in terms of editing encoder settings).
Their is a free version of dbPowerAmp that is in many ways superior to EAC. Quicker, easier to set up, just as secure.
Does one of the three encoders generally offer smaller file sizes across a diverse spectrum of music?
If your answer is that AAC trends a bit more efficient at the equivalent transparency threshold vs LAME, would you see a benefit to maintaining one format since music that I buy from Amazon will be 256 kbs mp3?
If AAC, what bitrate or quality setting would be transparent to most people as discussed, what settings would be comparable to Amazon's mp3 store?
I'm looking for an opinion then not based on theory, but on real world. Which one would you say is more efficient? For that one, can you give me some quality settings advice that will give me the smallest file size while being transparent for the vast majority of audiophiles.
I'm new to the forum and to the differences between modern encoders of mp3 and aac. I'd like to rip several CDs to the new Amazon Cloud Drive for the purpose of then using the Amazon Cloud player app on my android smartphone connected to my home audio system.
You evidently didn't read my post. There is no need to be rude. What good would my doing ABX testing with my ears do for my wife's experience? I'm more interested in the average of the critical listeners' abx testing results than my own personal results. I know I don't have more "golden ears" than many of the audiophiles in here.
My advice is to rip securely to lossless. Keep the files somewhere safe. Convert to either MP3 or AAC at 128kbps. Upload those to the cloud. If after some listening you decide they're not good enough, convert to a higher bitrate and replace them.Links to other's ABX tests are here.