Hi Mnyb,
I am probably deluding myself but I did a lot of research before choosing my (very portable) format and bitrate for bitrate the WMA VBR did very well against other formats and shows absolutely none of weird artifact sounds you can get with a lower size. No brutal chopping off of cymbals and high hats, no strange metallic noises and no tune altering distortion. Really, it sounds exceptional (for it's size) and I have been quite happy. When I compare my two databases (Lossless and 40 to 75) side by side of course I can hear the difference but it is remarkable what you still hear with the 40-75 VBR and an astonishingly low bitrate.
I think part of the reason I went so low initially was that I have been building the VBR database for more than 12 years and hard drive size at one time was an issue. The Lossless database is about 9 years of work. The full VBR database is over 9000 full albums ( I run a smaller one on my Squeezebox) and the Lossless database is almost that big.
I am probably deluding myself but I did a lot of research before choosing my (very portable) format and bitrate for bitrate the WMA VBR did very well against other formats and shows absolutely none of weird artifact sounds you can get with a lower size. No brutal chopping off of cymbals and high hats, no strange metallic noises and no tune altering distortion. Really, it sounds exceptional (for it's size) and I have been quite happy. When I compare my two databases (Lossless and 40 to 75) side by side of course I can hear the difference but it is remarkable what you still hear with the 40-75 VBR and an astonishingly low bitrate.
I think part of the reason I went so low initially was that I have been building the VBR database for more than 12 years and hard drive size at one time was an issue. The Lossless database is about 9 years of work. The full VBR database is over 9000 full albums ( I run a smaller one on my Squeezebox) and the Lossless database is almost that big.
Comment