It bites to not have more to work with....but whats lost is lost and I cant create better quality than what's left in my source -sigh-
Search found 4 matches
- Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:38 am
- Forum: Audio Processing
- Topic: Noob question
- Replies: 5
- Views: 966
Re: Noob question
I just did a VBR encoding over the full bitrate range (while leaving sample rate 22050) and guess what.....the max bitrate didnt exceed 138kbps
It bites to not have more to work with....but whats lost is lost and I cant create better quality than what's left in my source -sigh-
It bites to not have more to work with....but whats lost is lost and I cant create better quality than what's left in my source -sigh-
- Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:52 am
- Forum: Audio Processing
- Topic: Noob question
- Replies: 5
- Views: 966
Re: Noob question
@ Steve
Yes, I tested it again and you're right! Its's just that certain sample rates are incompatible with certain bitrates, it seems. Since 22050-320kbps didnt work I assumed it wouldnt work for all bitrates. Thanks for pointing that out.
Yes, I tested it again and you're right! Its's just that certain sample rates are incompatible with certain bitrates, it seems. Since 22050-320kbps didnt work I assumed it wouldnt work for all bitrates. Thanks for pointing that out.
- Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:56 pm
- Forum: Audio Processing
- Topic: Noob question
- Replies: 5
- Views: 966
Re: Noob question
Hi Koz, Thanks for your reply ;) The source file is a 16-bit stereo and has undergone several decompressions (maybe even conversions) to even come to its current PCM state. However, the ouput sounds wonderful/flawless so the damage -if any- is extremely limited. Audacity can handle it without a hitc...
- Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:09 pm
- Forum: Audio Processing
- Topic: Noob question
- Replies: 5
- Views: 966
Noob question
I have a source audio WAV/PCM (705kbps) with a sample rate of 22050hz that I wish to convert to MP3 with Lame3.98 encoder. Since MP3 doesnt support that sample rate I have will choose to re-encode with 44100hz. Now, my question is, does it make sense to encode at 320kbps (vs 160kbps for example) or ...