Site for learning about Music files?

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

oilboy123

Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
7,231
Location
Arlington, Washington
Trying to decide what file format to save music CDs on my hardrive. Using Windows Media player I guess?

Any good sites or info anyone knows that is good. I have not found a good sited dumbed down to my level.......
blush.gif


Thanks in advance
 
MP3 is the most universally compatible.

192 kbps continuous bit rate is "transparent" as in most people can't tell the difference between it and CD.

224 kbps variable bit rate is better quality and more effecient, because when there doesn't need to be data going through it uses the minimum, and when lots does there is all of it.

320 kbps is basically CD quality and as good as it gets, but the files are double the size of 192.

The lossless codecs like lossless AAC and lossless WMA among others are effecient and you don't lose any quality but the files are huge.

I generally rip at 320 kbps MP3 because it's sort of the compromise between compatibility, sound quality and file size.
 
Quality loss at lower bit rates, size at higher. Other formats are more effecient in how they use space or how much space they use for a given quality, but few are as universally compatible as MP3s which will play in almost anything.
 
Agreed. If you want to copy the files later to an iPod or something, use MP3 as it is more recognizable to various hardware. If you just want to keep it on your computer, WMA is fine and will use up less space. I save all my songs as 192K WMA and can't tell the difference from the original CD.
 
I use OGG Vorbis (search google) for my lossless rips and if I need to convert it to another format it's quick and easy.

but any lossless for even lossy format like mp3 will do good if your not an audiophile and plan on playing an mp3 tough a 10k+ sound system.
 
oilboy, do you have an MP3 player or Apple iPod?


MP3 is universally accepted, but it's file sizes are too big. If you have an MP3 player, stuffing as much on it as possible is important. I've found that 96Kbit WMA is really good for most stuff that's not hard rock. 128Kbit for more complex/hard rock stuff to maintain clarity.

If you go the iTunes/Apple route, the AAC codec at 96 or 128Kbit is excellent.

AACv2 is the cat's meow. 48Kbit is CD quality. Slacker uses that for it's mobile player.
 
Originally Posted By: jinx
I use OGG Vorbis (search google) for my lossless rips and if I need to convert it to another format it's quick and easy.

I thought Ogg Vorbis was a lossy format, just like MP3 but somewhat higher quality.

FLAC comes to mind when talking about lossless.
 
I agree about the new AAC codec, I listen to it at 64 kbps for online radio and it sounds incredible given the bit rate. I'd imagine 128 kbps is totally transparent.
 
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
What is the downside to MP3?


It is a "lossy" type of codec; meaning that after decompressing (the "dec" part of "codec") the output is *not* what was compressed in the first place.

As well, the .mp3 codec is not free.
 
Originally Posted By: MGregoir
192 kbps continuous bit rate is "transparent" as in most people can't tell the difference between it and CD.


[spits coffee all over computer monitor]
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: MGregoir
192 kbps continuous bit rate is "transparent" as in most people can't tell the difference between it and CD.


[spits coffee all over computer monitor]

Well, he is kind of right because he wrote "most people". Most people aren't audiophiles and are happy to listen to FM radio which has similar quality to 192 kbps mp3.

My suggestion to the OP would be to do some blind listening test. If he can't tell the difference between original and 192 kbps mp3, then it is good enough for him. I agree that there are better codecs out there (AAC+, Ogg Vorbis), but probably not as popular/wide-spread. Pretty much any device will play mp3 these days.
 
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
I see WMA, WMA pro, WMA variable bit rate and WMA lossless

Do the files get bigger going left to right?


Yes, depending on precisely how you set the variable bit rate, which can span quite a range.
 
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
I see WMA, WMA pro, WMA variable bit rate and WMA lossless

Do the files get bigger going left to right?

Not necessarily. It depends on the actual bit rate used. If you have a 192 kbps WMA (CBR), a 192 kbps WMA Pro, and a 192 kbps average WMA VBR, then they will all have similar file sizes. However, at the same bit rate, I would expect WMA Pro to have the best audio quality, followed by WMA VBR, and lastly WMA CBR.

WMA lossless will have significantly larger file size than the other three, but obviously the best quality (better than the other three).

But we are going back to what was said before: will you be able to tell the difference between them? And that only your own ears can decide.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
But we are going back to what was said before: will you be able to tell the difference between them? And that only your own ears can decide.


Part of the reason I'd lobby the OP to keep the files lossless is because in the future; where they would presumably still possess this file, playback quality may have improved or their ears became more refined and the better quality is now not inconsequential. This, coupled with the very reasonable cost of storage makes lossless encoding, in anything from WMA to AAC to FLAC and beyond, a viable day to day format.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
or their ears became more refined

Heh... I wish. Our hearing only gets worse as we age, unfortunately.

But I agree. Storage is cheap nowadays. Might as well go lossless. You can always go lossy from there if needed.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: jinx
I use OGG Vorbis (search google) for my lossless rips and if I need to convert it to another format it's quick and easy.

I thought Ogg Vorbis was a lossy format, just like MP3 but somewhat higher quality.

FLAC comes to mind when talking about lossless.


your right it's FLAC that's lossless and OGG lossy. either way both are good choices, sucks most mp3 players done support them
frown.gif
but I think the Sansa ones do but I don't remember.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
Transferring Music Files To USB: Why So Slow
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
OVERKILL
G
MS Surface Pro 9 Browser Problems
Replies
6
Views
175
Greenbeforeblue
W
Question for Social Media Cyber Security Gurus
2
Replies
22
Views
593
ka9mnx
dishdude
Just filed a glass claim
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
2K
Owen Lucas
C
Need help figuring out various dashboard lightbulbs on 1996 Chevy Caprice!
Replies
10
Views
282
Chris B.
Back
Top Bottom