View Single Post
Old 27th July 2010, 20:41   #14
KROCKS ZPR
Junior Member
 
KROCKS ZPR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: midwest
Posts: 12
What I find ironic is debating sound quality between 128 and 64, when 9 times out of 10, people are listening through cheap tiny desktop speakers that cant even give a 8kps stream any more merit. Then you have laptops, with their tiny teeny built in speakers, again cant make any difference to an 8kps stream. Neither one of these will make any difference to a 128 or a 64.

Run the sound through a real stereo system with real speakers, even a surround sound system, then you got the real results of a 128 or 64.

Oh..lets also look at the iPortables! Those teeny tiny earphones! Oh ya those will reproduce that nice fat bandwidth of sound! NOT!

So the point here is to find a balance that gives your station a good clean full rich sound when heard on a real audio system, but not so much that the stream itself prevents those other tiny speaker or earphone devices too much to handle to even connect, much less try to reproduce the frequency response!

Also the balance needs to consider the low bandwidth access, such as dialups or heavily shared tiers on DSL and cable.

64k is an excellent choice to serve both the high end audio systems as well as give the dialup users a fair chance to be able to tune in. Plus it is a good midway point between the different audio systems used by the listeners. Not all will be jamming out through a 10,000 watt 10 foot tall arrays of concert hall loudspeakers. But you can place good bets that the majority are listening via those teeny tiny desktop or built in laptop speakers, or through those teeny tiny earphones, which will not by any chance reproduce the full frequency response of a 128k stream.

My station runs 3 streams. A 128, a 48 and a 24 AAC+. Guess which one gets the most users?

Nope it aint the 128!


RFB
KROCKS ZPR is offline   Reply With Quote