My music professor told us that AIFF files are way better than MP3 files. He also said that sound systems that go beyond 20,000HZ produce a better sound even though we can only hear up to 20,000HZ.
1 Like
mp3 uses a algorithm of course to compress... the file size "without messing with quality" but in all reality... if you listen to both... you'll notice AIFF has more to the background than MP3 feeling more richer in quality.
THATS MY EXPERIENCE SOOOO
The 20KHZ range is just an average, a lot of people can hear higher frequencies.
MP3 is compressed audio, if you max out the bit rate when converting/compressing from the original source the quality is not so bad, but compared to other formats with superior compression / less compression / no compression it is quite poor.
MP3 is also not a recommended format for digital music samples / instruments etc eg fruityloops and abelton live etc
For music these days I try to get everything in FLAC format, it is much better quality than MP3 and most good audio / video software can play it back.
1 Like
It is, but not many can tell the difference between them on average. also the amount of storage space a FLAC file takes is absurdly stupid.
I usually try to buy things on CD's and then rip to FLAC. And if your outputing through decent equipment you can definitely tell the difference. 320kbps MP3 sounds horrible for most drum recordings and the sustain on guitar fades and distorts in this irritating way that only people who have heard live studio guitar and drums will really pick up on. FLAC files are probably 10X the size of MP3 but its really worth it if music is a big part of your life and you have decent headphones or speakers. When you switch back to MP3 everything sounds like its coming from the other side of a sheet of carboard. The detail and soundtage are just gone.
Would it be the tamber that is evident with frequencies above 20,000HZ?