is that the xp zune theme
no no no no no no no no nophishman420 wrote:
is that the xp zune theme
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
bigger than urs
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
108.9gb
11342 songs
11342 songs
Last edited by ph1shman420 (2009-09-26 13:43:51)
around 185 gig
43 gig
No, I don't need an attitude adjustment. You just need to fuck off.
2 years, 8 months ago
..But on topic: 37 GB.
7750 songs.
..But on topic: 37 GB.
7750 songs.
10GB of music a actively listen to
~20gig of music i just have for special purposes
~20gig of music i just have for special purposes
Last edited by menzo (2009-09-26 15:28:04)
95.09 GB
15517 songs
Have listened to about 98% of it. Still working on the last few hundred songs I added.
And then I've gotta get some money to get a bigger HDD and convert a ton of that to 320 since most of it is in 192
15517 songs
Have listened to about 98% of it. Still working on the last few hundred songs I added.
And then I've gotta get some money to get a bigger HDD and convert a ton of that to 320 since most of it is in 192
Last edited by mtb0minime (2009-09-26 15:35:50)
Huh?mtb0minime wrote:
and convert a ton of that to 320 since most of it is in 192
The only with you will achieve by converting 192 to 320 is nothing.
This.liquidat0r wrote:
Huh?mtb0minime wrote:
and convert a ton of that to 320 since most of it is in 192
The only with you will achieve by converting 192 to 320 is nothing.
Also, only 41 GB for me.
But I thought 320 kbps is better quality? Or are you saying it's unnoticeable?
Plus I figure if I'd be sharing any of it to keep up a ratio, it'd have to be 320 for the picky people. Maybe not, I guess?
Plus I figure if I'd be sharing any of it to keep up a ratio, it'd have to be 320 for the picky people. Maybe not, I guess?
/facepalmmtb0minime wrote:
But I thought 320 kbps is better quality? Or are you saying it's unnoticeable?
Plus I figure if I'd be sharing any of it to keep up a ratio, it'd have to be 320 for the picky people. Maybe not, I guess?
You are transcoding a file from lossy to lossy... Oh dear.
You are actually making the quality worse by converting a 192KBPS song file to 320KBPS. You can't convert a lossy file to a higher bitrate lossy file. It doesn't work like that.
You can convert lossless to lossy and lossless to lossless - e.g: FLAC -> V0 , FLAC -> 320KBPS; FLAC -> WAV, WAV -> ALAC.
You cannot do anything else. You're listening to worse quality music than the music you downloaded in the first place.
It's like taking a picture, 800x600, and making it 1280x1024. You're going to get pixelation, because there is no more information to fill in the new pixels.
Oh yes, I know that. Maybe there was some confusion in my original post. What I meant was that I'd need to re-rip all those CDs I have into 320 since I originally did it as 192 because I didn't have the space.Zimmer wrote:
/facepalmmtb0minime wrote:
But I thought 320 kbps is better quality? Or are you saying it's unnoticeable?
Plus I figure if I'd be sharing any of it to keep up a ratio, it'd have to be 320 for the picky people. Maybe not, I guess?
You are transcoding a file from lossy to lossy... Oh dear.
You are actually making the quality worse by converting a 192KBPS song file to 320KBPS. You can't convert a lossy file to a higher bitrate lossy file. It doesn't work like that.
You can convert lossless to lossy and lossless to lossless - e.g: FLAC -> V0 , FLAC -> 320KBPS; FLAC -> WAV, WAV -> ALAC.
You cannot do anything else. You're listening to worse quality music than the music you downloaded in the first place.
Heh, c'mon guys, I'm not that big of a tech idiot
Last edited by mtb0minime (2009-09-26 17:54:18)
~37GB some FLAC, some mp3
166 Gb
Lol, no where near as big as it should be.
81 Gb I have listened to roughly 90% of it.
110'ish .. some of it is radio shows and audiobooks though.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Why don't you rip it at native?mtb0minime wrote:
Oh yes, I know that. Maybe there was some confusion in my original post. What I meant was that I'd need to re-rip all those CDs I have into 320 since I originally did it as 192 because I didn't have the space.Zimmer wrote:
/facepalmmtb0minime wrote:
But I thought 320 kbps is better quality? Or are you saying it's unnoticeable?
Plus I figure if I'd be sharing any of it to keep up a ratio, it'd have to be 320 for the picky people. Maybe not, I guess?
You are transcoding a file from lossy to lossy... Oh dear.
You are actually making the quality worse by converting a 192KBPS song file to 320KBPS. You can't convert a lossy file to a higher bitrate lossy file. It doesn't work like that.
You can convert lossless to lossy and lossless to lossless - e.g: FLAC -> V0 , FLAC -> 320KBPS; FLAC -> WAV, WAV -> ALAC.
You cannot do anything else. You're listening to worse quality music than the music you downloaded in the first place.
Heh, c'mon guys, I'm not that big of a tech idiot
I like pie.
I only keep what I listen to.
Last edited by alexb (2009-09-27 20:20:51)
QFTalexb wrote:
I only keep what I listen to.