MIA

[Lagu]

[quote="rrcrain"]I've reserved one of Jussi's CDs at borders and will pick it up tonight.

Rcrain! Great to hear, you will listen to Jussi. Many peoples get tears in their eyes so beautiful is this voice.

Thank you.
Lagu :D

[Ototero]

Hey Oli, TT, DC, AMD, a lot in common

[Empty_5oul]

ot maybe have a game with me someday then :thumbleft:

[Ototero]

yeah, why not.

[NeoGen]

rrcrain, you must be the person indicated to ask this question. Can you tell a difference in the sound between an MP3 at maximum quality (320kbit/s) and an original song (uncompressed)?

I can tell a very slight difference in MP3's at 192kbit/s and the original songs, but only if played really loud so I can focus on the background sounds. But above that, I can't tell the difference anymore... :P

And then again, there might be a difference but probably computer speakers aren't the best ones to make the test...

[Anonymous]

There is a difference. MP3 is a poor method to encode and compress music, even Microsofts WMA format is a major advancement over MP3. The best MP3 is perhaps FM radio quality.

[rrcrain]

Sorry, that last post was mine.

[NeoGen]

hmm.... I just might start compressing my songs here in wma then...

[Empty_5oul]

if you have a MP3 player you have to check what that can take or if you are gonna get one what it will take. would be a shame to convert it all to wma and then find it can't be used.

[rrcrain]

Converting an MP3 to WMA will make it worse! Both compression methods throw away data and compromise sound quality.