How different do the bitrates really sound?
Am I the only one who can't tell the difference between 128 kbps and anything above?
I have a Windows 10gb iPod and about 2,700 songs, so I'm dying to compress my files as much as possible... sound quality is an issue of course, but so is getting them to fit.
I am considering ripping them all at 96 kbps (gasp) mp3s- don't get me wrong, I'm a serious listener, but with the earbuds I honestly notice only a little difference between 96 and the higher bitrates. Still much better than FM radio...
Am I deaf, or perhaps testing with rather flat tracks? Will all of you scorn me if I listen to such "lossy" compressions? I don't mean to argue with science...
My only other options are to switch to Windows iTunes (although my 'pod came with MusicMatch software- will it work?) and rip my songs in AAC format (maybe 96? any suggestions?). Or I have to start painfully choosing the songs that go...
[960 byte] By [
Jrbmoran] at [2007-11-9 15:56:34]
# 1 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
No, you're not the only one who can't tell! Plenty of people decide to go for lower bitrates to get more onto the HDD. For God's sake, don't worry about whether your ears are 'good enough' or anything like that.
It largely comes down to the equipment you're using, and whether you know what to listen for. There are some great resources out there with sound clips of compression artefacts, which you can download and use to train your ears with if you like. Of course, there's an argument which runs: why train yourself just to hear something which is going to cost you HDD space, if you're happy with your compressed files now?
I also have a 10 GB iPod, and I have a ~3600 track library, encoded at ~200kbps. Rather than compromising on quality, I've taken a different, painless route:
My iPod contains only 4- and 5-star tracks, as rated in iTunes - I just have smartlists for the two ratings, which sync automatically. Before iTunes came along, I just rotated the albums as and when I felt like it. In fact, there are 'only' 5.7 GB on the iPod right now.
Max out on quality, and relax the requirement to fit everything onto the iPod, and you'll probably get more from the music in the end! Not to mention that you won't need to re-encode everything when your MP3 player's capacity increases tenfold in a few years. :)
# 2 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
Thanks samwise, very good point about future re-encoding. Do you have the url of a good compression sound clips place? Also, I appreciate your "rotating" solution, but with 2700 songs I would probably attempt iTunes and AAC at 96 kbps first... any thoughts on that?
# 3 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
Samwise impresses me with his answers all the time. he knows what he likes but doesn't expect the world to cave to his demands. just had to say that first.
as far as comparisons and examples...
http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/ipod/
is a pretty good resource. i'm sure there are those that will say he doesn't know what he's talking about, but like Samwise would probably tell you, you've gotta pick what works best for you.
as far as 96kbps...eek. in my opinion that's pretty horrid and only good for spoken word recordings. but if you can stand it, feel free. it's your iPod.
my approach is a bit more extreme than Samwise's. i rip everything at 256 AAC because that's the smallest file sized format and bitrate that I don't notice things. i've been listening to digital audio for a long time and also consider myself a musician, so i've had lots of time to train my ears to hear things that the average listener won't. YMMV.
i'm also blessed enough to have a 40 gig iPod. i haven't ripped my entire collection yet, but i have 230 CD's in it and 15 or 16 gigs to go.
based on my 94 meg average album size, that's 170 more CD's i can fit on it. even on a 10 gig ipod at 256aac, you should be able to get 100 CD's into it.
but ultimately it comes down to what sounds good to you and how much you want to get into your iPod. make the decision that best deals with those two factors.
Skip
Skip
# 4 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
Awwww... Thanks very much Skip! :) I'm a great admirer of these forums at their best - just trying to keep to that standard.
I'm fairly sure Skip's right about AAC - it is shaping up to be the future dominant format. I've held off so far, partly because I've followed the maturation process of MP3 for a while and so expect AAC to be tweaked significantly over the next few years. I have 60% of my CDs stored in FLAC format, but re-extracting the other 40% would mean a lot of work! Finally, I must confess that it's been a couple of years since I've listened to a CD in a serious way - I've been buying and ripping immediately, and never playing the discs - so I may not be hearing everything in the few AAC test tracks I've encoded to date.
Since you're starting from scratch, Jrbmoran, I'd advise you to go with AAC at at -least- 128k. If by any chance you're sitting on a large amount of HDD space, you could also take the 'nuclear option' and archive in FLAC for later use. It's -really- expensive on hard disc space though!
Sam
# 5 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
I'm doing a *LOT* of testing on bitrates right now -- installed iTunes just last weekend, and have put only 10 CD's on it so far.
I find myself leaning toward 192 for right now, and with more tests pending, but I have a question:
I'm beginning to suspect that 192 MP3 sounds just a little bit better than 192 AAC. Am I deluding myself?
# 6 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
I've been staying away from the AAC format so far because I like to use mp3gain to equalize my track volumes. Not really happy with Sound Check in iTunes. It adds a boost to the tracks and sometimes causes distortion. Anyone else have this problem or a workaround?
# 7 Re: How different do the bitrates really sound?
It depends on your ears, equipment, source and encoder.
all of those factors contribute to the end result being the sound quality. Personally when outputting to my stereo I can tell the difference between 128 mp3 and 192 mp3.
I usually rip at -aps with a few switches, or APE (Lossless).
Also, bitrate means crap if you're comparing it to the sound quality.
for instance, 128 OGG vorbis is better than 128 MP3, and comparible to 160 MP3. You can rip at 128 (cd-quality) and for many not notice a difference. Just use the most stable version of LAME, no alphas, and you'll be fine.
