[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Lower Lower Price on DDAR
- To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: Lower Lower Price on DDAR
- From: Paul Miller <pmiller@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 09:25:48 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Your second observation came to mind straight away after I read Tims
reply.
Tim... is there any point in doing the test if you will not use MP3s
anyway, even if (for example) there is negligible difference at 256K.
What's the test for Tim?
just a thought...
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark McCall [mailto:mark@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 02 April 2001 09:19
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Lower Lower Price on DDAR
> Count me out - you know my feelings on mp3 :)
But Tim....the DDAR plays straight .wav files too. Personally the
convience
of the system has meant I've heard more of my music that I had done in a
long time. Having instant access to all my 4000 tracks (and that's
small by
most peoples standards) is fab!
> On a more serious note, I should be in a position to do the blind test
on
> encoding rates later today. I've downloaded the LAME encoder. I was
> intending to use it with CDex 1.30, but have read elsewhere that it is
best
> to rip the CD first. Is that the case or should I be OK with what I've
got.
Hmmmm...seems from you statement above that you've already made your
mind up
you don't like MP3s before you start these tests.
M.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|