Date:         Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:41:59 -0600
Reply-To:     [log in to unmask]
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Jeffrey Kane <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Sam Kane Beef Processors
Subject:      Re: Soundcard/iTunes phollies
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>

Make that hydrogenaudio.*ORG*!

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dave Nolan
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Soundcard/iTunes phollies

Eric -

Just wondering where you might have heard these "anecdotes" about WMP vs.
iTunes?

Is there any good resource/online discussion about different MP3 encoding
techniques / players / etc... that you've found to have a good "signal-to-
noise ratio"?

I've done minimal testing comparison of encoders for Mac, and am currently
using Peak with LameLib (much better results @ 128kbps stereo on my intel
Mac than iTunes)...

dave nolan
92nd St. Y
NYC

>I've not tested this hypothesis to a great extent, but anecdotally it
>seems that iTunes is much less efficient at handling VBR encoded MP3s
>than Fixed Bit Rate MP3s, whereas WMP seems to handle VBR and FBR MP3s
>equally well.
>
>Anyone else notice similar VBR/FBR difference between iTunes and WMP?
>
>Eric Jacobs
>The Audio Archive
>tel: 408.221.2128
>fax: 408.549.9867
>mailto:[log in to unmask]
>