![]() ![]() The filter cuts at around 11 kHz and the spectrum is very “holey”.Īs a result of this, I have chosen to use 320 kbps MP3s for my collection. Note the change of scaling on the y-axis. High frequency content is definitely lost.Ħ4 kbps MP3. ![]() The high-cut now occurs already at around 16 kHz. The audio is still cut at around 20 kHz, but more “holes” now appear at high frequencies.ġ28 kbps MP3. At high frequencies a bit of “holes” appear.Ģ56 kbps MP3. It is seen that a low-pass filter is applied to remove everything above 20 kHz. The spectrum is very tight-looking.ģ20 kbps MP3. The highest represented frequency is 24 kHz (i.e. The y-axis is frequency and the x-axis is time. ![]() The following figures show a spectrograms for WAVE, 64 kbps, 128 kbps, 256 kbps, and 320 kbps, respectively. The WAVE is converted to MP3 using lame: lame -b XYZ song.wav song.mp3 where XYZ is 64, 128, 256, and 320, respectively.Īnalysis was performed by Sonic Visualiser. The more efficient the codec at lower bitrates, the smaller the files. The difference between codecs is mostly demonstrated at lower bitrates, which, at their inception, was the target audience for audio codecs. Music: “Sea of Sorrow” by Get Your Gun recorded at a sampling rate of 48 kHz. 320 kbps MP3 will probably be compatible with more devices and software than AAC, so that could be a benefit. Here is shown the difference between a WAVE file and derived MP3 files of different bitrates. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |