what's the difference btwn mp3 & mp3pro

Lois Gilbert · October-6th-2004, 01:53 AM

thanks

DWBass · October-6th-2004, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lois Gilbert

thanks

Here's some reading. MP3Pro

My opinion..........stick with MP3. Just make sure you use a good program with a good decoder. I use MusicMatch Jukebox 9. I get terrific results when I rip. MusicMatch also has the MP3Pro option and I just re-encoded 40 tunes to MP3Pro just to see if there was a discerning difference and my ears detected a degrade in quality of the file. Fidelity wise, they sounded bad. IMO It's great that it can shrink files and that's good for e-mailing but for music on your computer or portable device, stick with MP3 or WMA. Never the less, I deleted the 40 songs (I didn't need them. Already burned the tunes to a cd)!

Lois Gilbert · October-6th-2004, 09:10 PM

thank you so much - the article was very helpful. Now that we're doing all our sound bites on JC in MP3 (soon to be available for download) I want to know the difference - you would think pro would be better quality but it doesn't seem that way

thanks again

Cem · October-7th-2004, 02:41 AM

Lois, I would also recommend iTunes & its AAC compression format. At 192 kilobits per second, the sound quality is quite similar to mp3's compressed at 256 kbps. This means that you can cram more music into the same storage space. iTunes Media Player works very well, is more logical and user friendly than others. I've been converting my whole collection and it works great. One disadvantage of AAC is that it is not supported by many portable devices. So, check into that before you do any conversions.

Tanager · October-7th-2004, 08:19 AM

Cem, I'd respectfully disagree, unless Lois makes the samples available in mp3 as well. Mp3 is still much more widely supported, and I think that is probably the most important thing for a site dedicated to publicizing and promoting music.

DWBass · October-7th-2004, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanager

Cem, I'd respectfully disagree, unless Lois makes the samples available in mp3 as well. Mp3 is still much more widely supported, and I think that is probably the most important thing for a site dedicated to publicizing and promoting music.

I agree. I hate Real Audio. WMA is okay but you don't have the many different options that MP3 decoders give. Stick with MP3! In addition, MP3Pro is just a name and not meant to imply that it is better than MP3.

Cem · October-7th-2004, 06:33 PM

Yes, you folks are right, mp3s are more popular, but AACs sound better and I really like iTunes. I'm no Mac shill, but love the simplicity, straight-forwardness of iTunes and how good music sounds played through it. I'd like to see it more popularized. Maybe, Lois is into not losing money & stuff...to each their own, I guess.

Pete C · October-7th-2004, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cem

Yes, you folks are right, mp3s are more popular, but AACs sound better and I really like iTunes. I'm no Mac shill, but love the simplicity, straight-forwardness of iTunes and how good music sounds played through it. I'd like to see it more popularized. Maybe, Lois is into not losing money & stuff...to each their own, I guess.

MP3 is the standard for downloads of the variety that Lois is talking about, which I assume may be a combination of audio samples and free or for sale downloads(?) Not only would AACs not make sense in this context, they may be a proprietary format with Apple/iTunes.