> MP3 is a lossy compression format, and as such, it by definition has to
>throw away part of the audio signal, never to be recovered.  It uses a
>frequency transform as part of the compression, which leads to certain
>side effects.  So the upshot is the following, in my opinion, compared
>to uncompressed 44.1:


In response to the beginning of this thread, I use MP3's to give away my
music.  if you want to hear any, try http://www.bentdesign.com/chill

Mp3 is a great format... it is intended to compress audio by filtering out
all tones imperceptible to the human ear.  When encoded at 160k, there is
very little/no perceptible difference between it an uncompressed audio...
there have been studies at berkely and other such respectable places to try
and prove this, and they have shown that more than not people cannot tell
the difference.  Of course there are exceptions to this, but on the whole
mp3 is a great format -- if it was not, would sony and a whole whack of
other large record companies have formed a commission to battle music piracy
in the mp3 format?  It's catching on.