mp3 Heretic? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : mp3 Heretic?



Auricauricle
11-30-2009, 01:10 PM
I have read plenty of posts here, deriding the mp3 format and want some feedback here. Recently, I have started using a downloader that allows me to process files at 64 kbps. This is quite slower than the standard 128 kbps that I've seen used as a defalt setting. While the recording doesn't have the same lucidity of pristine CD's, the sound quality is not altogether horrible to my ears. I know that lossless formats are all the rage here, but for my limitations and puposes this seems a pretty good compromise.

What sayeth now, oh Brown Cows?

Geoffcin
11-30-2009, 01:31 PM
I would say that 192k would be the minimum quality for ipod use for me. Most of my stuff on the mp3 player is encoded at 320k, and at that rate I can't hear a difference unless I use the main system, and even then it's probably the quality between my CD player and Sansa View that makes the difference noticable.

I've actually never heard anything ripped at 64k. What software are you using? Are you sure your ripping at 64k?

bobsticks
11-30-2009, 01:31 PM
The only time I ever consider it is if I'm making a comp for a long trip in the truck...I can't stand listening to low-rate stuff on either of my home systems...uugghh

atomicAdam
11-30-2009, 02:38 PM
I would say that 192k would be the minimum quality for ipod use for me. Most of my stuff on the mp3 player is encoded at 320k, and at that rate I can't hear a difference unless I use the main system, and even then it's probably the quality between my CD player and Sansa View that makes the difference noticable.

I've actually never heard anything ripped at 64k. What software are you using? Are you sure your ripping at 64k?


I'm in Geoffcin's boat. 192k at least, and 320k when I actually have the CD to rip from. Use the LAME codex to code with. It is constantly ranked the best and it is free.

audio amateur
11-30-2009, 02:58 PM
What exactly do you mean by 'downloader'?

I have to admit that 64kbps is something most anyone can tell you that it's poor quality. 128kbps, although not CD quality, is a different story.

rob_a
11-30-2009, 04:07 PM
I am not a fan of MP3 or digital down load stuff as it stands right now. As soon as the quality improves, I might take a stab at it. The harsh digitalness of the sound is like nails on a chalkboard for me! I do use Itunes at work, and even with their lossless option where I can upload at 845kbps in 16 bit, the sound is so so. To help this I go throw an external USB DAC, then tube amp to tame the beast that is “Digital Audio!” The sound quality is good, not great. I can imagine this will get better over time, but for now I prefer plain old CD’s

poppachubby
11-30-2009, 06:13 PM
I'm not even sure if I've heard a file so low. I have heard 128 and the compression is beyond description. Shame on you Auric, shame on you!!!

Luvin Da Blues
11-30-2009, 06:19 PM
What sayeth now, oh Brown Cows?

Sacré bleu

Feanor
12-01-2009, 09:17 AM
I have read plenty of posts here, deriding the mp3 format and want some feedback here. Recently, I have started using a downloader that allows me to process files at 64 kbps. This is quite slower than the standard 128 kbps that I've seen used as a defalt setting. While the recording doesn't have the same lucidity of pristine CD's, the sound quality is not altogether horrible to my ears. I know that lossless formats are all the rage here, but for my limitations and puposes this seems a pretty good compromise.

What sayeth now, oh Brown Cows?
I refuse to pay for MP3 downloads in general. The cost per "song" is typically as high as for CD and this is gouge, IMO.

Granted the quality of 320 kbps or VBR Extreme is such that the quality of master rather than the file format is determinent of ultimate playback quality. However on principle I always take the CD. Admittedly it's tempting to download a Naxos (classical) recording in 320 MP3 format for US$7 versus $8-10 plus shipping for the CD but so far I've held out.

For my iPod I convert to 256 kbps or an equivalent VBR. I have a DVD at 320 kbps of music I listen to on my work computer. Both of these are quite satisfactory for their respective environments.

E-Stat
12-01-2009, 10:28 AM
Recently, I have started using a downloader that allows me to process files at 64 kbps...What sayeth now, oh Brown Cows?
Hmmm. Highs tend to get "swishy" at that rate to these ears. 320k using LAME encoder actually sounds pretty darn good.

rw