Why ripping mp3's in joint stero mode

[yanon]

Joint-stereo mode filters stereo signals that human ears preceive as mono and encodes them into one channel to save space. How can Joint-stereo model human hearings? Also, that little space saving doesn't matter at high bit rate--192Kb+.
I just don't understand why people still rip audio cd at high bitrate (192Kb+) with joint-stereo mode turned on.

[Maxamus]

joint stereo files are in fact more bigger that just stereo and they are also 2 channels not 1. Also 192kb/s is far better than 128/160, u only have to listen to mp3z to see that.
Heres an extract from r3mix which tells you all you need to know.

Joint Stereo (-mj) is the best setting with Lame. This allows the encoder to dynamically adapt to the music and chooses the best stereo mode for each frame: stereo or ms-stereo. No stereo separation problems can occur in a good implemented JS mode, because when there is too much difference between the L and R channel, simple stereo will be used on that frame. All the frames that are encoded in ms-stereo benefit from the lower bitrate requirement and can thus use the extra bits for more accurate encoding.

The underlying reason why you read sometimes that "joint stereo is no good" is simply because the Xing and Fraunhofer implementation is not perfect. Again Lame is much more tweaked and brings a good joint stereo mode. Another reason is that some people mix up the terms "joint stereo", "ms stereo" and "intensity stereo".

[lore]

Don't worry when you use it in LAME, it rocks

[yanon]

I think you misunderstood my question. I know that 192 Kbits+ mp3 is superior to lower bit rate mp3. In fact, all of the mp3's in my mp3 collection are 192 Kbits+. It's good to hear that LAME's js mode works well but, unfortunately, internet mp3 sharing applications don't show encoder information. Therefore, I will stick to stereo mode when downloading from unknown sources. At least, all encoders have good support for stereo mode.

[lore]

yeah I downloaded many many craps from internet, the problem is that some people still thinks that Xing is a good encoder...
There's no way to know how they encode 'till you've already got the file, I would suggest at least to check them with EncSpot, even though I know is not accurate most of times