Do some albums lend themselves to compression ?

[activebass]

I have downloaded several albums which are compressed in 320kbps and compared them to either a FLAC version or the CD version and am quite astonished that there is such a difference in quality.

Having been happy with 160kbs compression on my iTunes for a long time, i recently started to rip at 320kbps as my ears are starting to hear the imperfections.

Recently though, i have come across some albums that really sound poor on 320kbpos.

I'm wondering whether is the way some people out there rip their album and then upload it or whether some albums are just sonically more conducive to being ripped?

I downloaded two Jamiroquai album's from the same person both compressed @ 320 kbps. The Return of the Space Cowboy and Travelling without moving.

Space Cowboy sounds really poor at 320kbps while Travelling Without Moving sounds good and close to the real thing.

 

[idc]

I would be importing your albums at lossless. With extended listening and practice you will start to notice the difference between 320kbps and lossless. The lower bit rate will sound flatter and less dynamic.

I am sure the quality issue is down to the original recording. The better the recording the more it will shine with a higher bit rate. Poor recordings will reveal their sonic shortcomings. I don't see how it can be down to the way the CD is imported.

 

[Sorreltiger]

An mp3 file samples the original waveform. The more frequent the sampling, the more complex the mp3 version of the original. Even then, it will be peaks and troughs, transients and complex waveforms that are smoothed out. It stands to reason IMHO that music with extremes of pitch, loads of complex transients and a range of acoustic instruments will be difficult to reproduce faithfully. Where the dynamic range is limited, where there aren't many sudden transients and where the instrument's natural waveform is closer to a sine wave (flutey/electronic??), I'd expect the mp3 to cope better.