Re: Apple Computer changes its name

["Simon D. Williams" <bb065@chebucto.ns.ca>]

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Matthew T. Russotto wrote:

> In article <1168868350.414093.269480@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
>  <bieling@terra.es> wrote:
> >
> >Let's say that we've got a music file with a bitrate x. We burn this
> >file into a CD (AIFF), then we encode it from the CD's AIFF into
> >another mp3 file with the same bitrate x as the original. The question
> >is, have we really lost any quality in the process? I ask because I'm
> >not so sure... ?
> 
> If you use exactly the same codec with exactly the same settings, I'd
> hope there would be no quality loss.  I don't know if this is the
> right term, but I call this a "stable" codec -- one where C(D(x)) = x

Going from mp3 to AIFF, you don't lose any sound quality, however you also
don't gain any. That is to say, you end up with "CD Quality" sound that
sounds like the mp3. If you take that already degraded file and convert it
to mp3 again you will lose sound quality.
The effect might be less noticeable if the mp3 is encoded at a higher
bitrate and/or if the transcoding software applies an enhancement
logarithm to compensate for deficiencies in the mp3, but it's still
there.
You can easily test this by transcoding a standard 128K mp3 back and forth
a few times... just like with copying tape, the further you get from the
original the more degraded the sound quality is.

... and FWIW, none of this is relevant to the Apple II ;-P

-s
 _____
|[LD8]! 8-BIT SOUND & FURY : APPLE ][ AUDIO & MUSIC RESOURCES
|  o. | +--------- http://8bitsoundandfury.ld8.org ---------+
!__!__! OLD APPLE WEB SERVER LIST  http://www.ld8.org/servers