Tweet
when u encode songs and make the setting for the channels, will there be any difference between 'stereo' and 'joint stereo'?
-
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
Warning: layman's explanation below: :D
With "joint stereo" the file will be smaller, almost as small as a mono, but it will be rendered in full stereo when played back. That's because joint stereo saves space by keeping just the information common to both channels on a mono track plus the exceptions that make one channel differ from the other. When played back this all gets put back together to recreate the two distinct stereo channels. -
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
ok.. so in terms of sound quality, which 1 will perform better?Comment
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
It should be the same quality, as long as you encoded 2-channel stereo and joint-stereo from the same original file and as long as your player can play joint-stereo.Comment
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
as Joint stereo is more efficient it leaves more room for encoding quality, so Joint Stereo should give higher quality files.Comment
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
Spoon, is that to mean that you can afford to encode at a higher bitrate (nearly double) when using joint stereo since the output file size is proportional to bitrate and number of actual channels?Comment
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
If you take CBR say 128Kbps then internally it is a little like vbr, if you have stereo then each channel is 64 kbps, now if you have joint stereo and it is able to encode the same quality as one 64 kbps channel with 96kbps then the remaing kbps is used for quality.
Thinking another way 128Kbps is not just fixed 128 Kbps, otherwise every mp3 encoder would produce identical sounding files, which they do not, so there is a quality leeway within that 128Kbps.
...if that makes sense.Comment
-
Re: Stereo Vs Joint Stereo
:confused: Errrr..... maybe after a cup of strong coffee :D
But I fully believe you so I'll be using joint stereo from now on
Comment
Comment