Mp3 Encoding Help

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by sickmailer, May 28, 2002.

  1. sickmailer

    sickmailer Guest

    Which is better? Encoding in 44100 Hz or 48000 Hz.
     
  2. dreamliner77

    dreamliner77 The Analog Kid

    Messages:
    4,702
    Location:
    Red Sox Nation
    44.1

    It's the sampling rate of cd's so if you decide to make a cd, you won't have to reconvert the sampling rate. (loses quality)
     
  3. AmarSingh

    AmarSingh Guest

    yeah...use 44100
     
  4. Geffy

    Geffy Moderator Folding Team

    Messages:
    7,805
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    No point in using 48 kHz unless you are recording from a Record or some Analogue system. CDs only use 44.1 kHz, so using anything higher would be a waste of space. Also dont encode much higher then 128 kbps for MP3 or 96 kbps for WMA. After those you arent gaining much more quality, only the file size gets bigger.
     
  5. niabi

    niabi Guest

    gtgarside i take it you hearing is not that goo, or your spekear system blows !

    of course you gain a lot more from 160k or even 192k!!!

    128k DOES reduce quality, but you can't really hear it con cheap speakers that come with your compaq!

    i can REALLY tell the diference betwen 128k, 160k and 192k
    after that on 256k is really hard to tell the diference, but between 128 and 192 i would definitl use 192 for archiving purposes and to play on hi end systems, if you just want to listen on cheap compaq speakers then just use 128k or even 96k you wont hear a diference from the CD :D

    nIabI
     
  6. Taurus

    Taurus hardware monkey

    Messages:
    3,206
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    i'm with niabi. all my ripped songs are 192... i find it's a good compromise between size and quality. but i admit that i am an audiophile and listen to my music at a robust volume. for the average listener, 128 is just fine.
     
  7. AmarSingh

    AmarSingh Guest

    i agree with both niabi and taurus
     
  8. Geffy

    Geffy Moderator Folding Team

    Messages:
    7,805
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    *Smack*
    your punished.

    I have good hearing, and an Audigy with Cambridge SoundWorks Speakers, I was only quoting the normal recommended MP3 bitrate. I am just saying that it is a waste of space to use the 320kbps, as that is insane, you cant hear the difference.

    Anyway if you are so hung up on audio quality what are you doing listening to stuff from a PC anyway. Go listen to a Record.
     
  9. mbunny

    mbunny Guest

    EAC + LAME + VBR + r3mix settings = god

    btw... 128kbps != CD Quality...
    256kbps = CD Quality.

    192 is the optimum bitrate but to make it even better you should use LAME to encode using r3mix settings

    so those bits that aren't that complex it goes down to a really low 32kbps but on the really complex bits it'll jump up to 320kbps etc... of course it also does inbetween =P

    hehehe... sif use wma... as good a codec as it is, they don't have vbr.

    OGG is god though =) just need more ogg UI's =)
     
  10. GZFirestorm

    GZFirestorm Guest

    has anyone else noticed that ever since winXP came out, any new mp3's recorded at 128 sound just ever so slightly more "twangy" (same with the recommended WMA CD quality setting)?
     
  11. Taurus

    Taurus hardware monkey

    Messages:
    3,206
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    oh, so that's where it's at?? */runs out to buy vinyl* }:>
     
  12. Geffy

    Geffy Moderator Folding Team

    Messages:
    7,805
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    yeah records have the best sound as it is analogue and not digital so its not a block sin wave it is a true sin wave.

    Only prob, you cant download records of KaZaA or WinMX