<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Article: Beginners Guide To Bitrates</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/</link>
	<description>The latest on the indie, alternative, and rock music scene including news, music, contest, interviews, and more. Best described as your favorite place to find new bands.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:32:35 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bryce Jacobson</title>
		<link>http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/comment-page-1/#comment-28993</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryce Jacobson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 15:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/#comment-28993</guid>
		<description>AAC probably would have caught on more if it was just called mp4. And your correct that a 128 aac is about equal to a 192 mp3.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AAC probably would have caught on more if it was just called mp4. And your correct that a 128 aac is about equal to a 192 mp3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julie</title>
		<link>http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/comment-page-1/#comment-28992</link>
		<dc:creator>Julie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 09:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/#comment-28992</guid>
		<description>heads up: expect should be --&gt; expert

i agree, these days, in terms of music, there really isn&#039;t a huge trade off in terms of space/quality. Off course that stops when we talk about mp3 players. it isn&#039;t hard to fit your entire music collection on a $120 harddrive, but getting it to fit on an equal value mp3 player is impossible.

it should be noted that the itunes store encodes their songs in a different container format than mp3. supposedly the 128kbsp itunes uses is comparable to something higher in mp3 (i&#039;m guessing 192). it&#039;s also worthwhile noting that the aac-plus container has one of the best compression to quality ratios i&#039;ve ever heard. personally, I use (mp3) -V2 VBR in Lame.  If you don&#039;t know about CBR vs VBR i suggest googling or wiki-ing it.  VBR is like the middleman in space/quality tradeoff.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>heads up: expect should be &#8211;&gt; expert</p>
<p>i agree, these days, in terms of music, there really isn&#8217;t a huge trade off in terms of space/quality. Off course that stops when we talk about mp3 players. it isn&#8217;t hard to fit your entire music collection on a $120 harddrive, but getting it to fit on an equal value mp3 player is impossible.</p>
<p>it should be noted that the itunes store encodes their songs in a different container format than mp3. supposedly the 128kbsp itunes uses is comparable to something higher in mp3 (i&#8217;m guessing 192). it&#8217;s also worthwhile noting that the aac-plus container has one of the best compression to quality ratios i&#8217;ve ever heard. personally, I use (mp3) -V2 VBR in Lame.  If you don&#8217;t know about CBR vs VBR i suggest googling or wiki-ing it.  VBR is like the middleman in space/quality tradeoff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyler Hayes</title>
		<link>http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/comment-page-1/#comment-28967</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyler Hayes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 04:03:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/#comment-28967</guid>
		<description>yeah I think hard drive space will determine some of the format issues down the road.

also there are obviously better formats than mp3, but it is just so widely accepted that it is hard not to use it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yeah I think hard drive space will determine some of the format issues down the road.</p>
<p>also there are obviously better formats than mp3, but it is just so widely accepted that it is hard not to use it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryce Jacobson</title>
		<link>http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/comment-page-1/#comment-28965</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryce Jacobson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 03:06:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2007/10/06/article-beginners-guide-to-bitrates/#comment-28965</guid>
		<description>For me, I&#039;ll encode most cd&#039;s at 192kbs AAC (an mp4 format that not only is better quality then mp3, but it compresses the file more for a smaller size). If its a really good album I&#039;ll encode it in Apple Lossless format. Hard Drives are getting cheaper and bigger these days so its only smart to encode your music at a higher rate for better quality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For me, I&#8217;ll encode most cd&#8217;s at 192kbs AAC (an mp4 format that not only is better quality then mp3, but it compresses the file more for a smaller size). If its a really good album I&#8217;ll encode it in Apple Lossless format. Hard Drives are getting cheaper and bigger these days so its only smart to encode your music at a higher rate for better quality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
