MP 3 optimum bit rate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter paresh
  • Start date Start date
P

paresh

Member
Hi - Is there any agreement on the optimum for CD quality? I can't really hear the difference bet 128 & 256. Thanks.
 
CD's are usually made with .wav files. They give the highest quality. A 320K MP3 sounds pretty close to .wav to the average listener. 128 is crappy IMHO and 256 is a bit better.
 
It depends who the CD is for. If the CD is only for you, then 128K is sufficient, and you can fit twice as many pieces on it. If you are making CDs for sale, you probably won't be using MP3 format anyway. I suspect that the more time someone spends mixing and listening to well produced music with high-end equipment, the better they get at hearing the difference between different bit-rates and equipment.
 
paresh said:
Hi - Is there any agreement on the optimum for CD quality? I can't really hear the difference bet 128 & 256. Thanks.
Click to expand...

No mp3 is CD quality. If you want CD quality use a lossless codec.
 
Thanks for responses. Everyone's picking up on the words "CD". The question really is what is the optimum bit rate for encoding MP3's so that i am not just creating a larger file without any audible improvement?
 
paresh said:
Thanks for responses. Everyone's picking up on the words "CD". The question really is what is the optimum bit rate for encoding MP3's so that i am not just creating a larger file without any audible improvement?
Click to expand...

Audible improvement to whom? I find lossless formats to be audibly better than 256kbps mp3. Why so stuck on small file size? Are your fans all on dialup?
 
Yes lossless is best. I have a client who wants me to create MP3's out of some songs he recorded.

Small file size - maybe it doesn't matter but I was just thinking if he loads them into an MP3 player I didn't want to take up excessive space. Maybe that's not an issue with larger capacity MP3 players...
 
paresh said:
Yes lossless is best. I have a client who wants me to create MP3's out of some songs he recorded.

Small file size - maybe it doesn't matter but I was just thinking if he loads them into an MP3 player I didn't want to take up excessive space. Maybe that's not an issue with larger capacity MP3 players...
Click to expand...

So it's not a general question, it's a question about what will make one specific user happy. Maybe you should ask him rather than us, or just help him learn how to do it himself and save yourself from the drudgery of making mp3 files out of wave files.
 
No offense, but if your client can't figure out how to make their own MP3's from a CD you give them - then they are morons and probably won't care what bitrate the MP3 is.
 
You'd be surprised just how often this is asked for.

DogmaticVox said:
No offense, but if your client can't figure out how to make their own MP3's from a CD you give them - then they are morons and probably won't care what bitrate the MP3 is.
Click to expand...


As for the whole .mp3 thing...seriously, we all have crazy fast internet and cheap hard drives. There is no reason to "dumb down" the quality of recordings so you can hear the song 12 seconds earlier when downloading. Sigh. Rant off. I feel better. Thanks for listening ;)
 
320 Kb/s is the highest bit rate the MP3 standard allows. In this day and age, all devices will be comfortable storing and playing songs at that quality, so use that.

RAMI said:
"Mp3" and "CD quality" don't belong in the same snetence.
Click to expand...

Unless that sentence is something like "MP3 files are not CD quality."
 
paresh said:
Hi - Is there any agreement on the optimum for CD quality? I can't really hear the difference bet 128 & 256. Thanks.
Click to expand...
By definition the "optimum" is the highest bit rate at which you can encode. These when virtually everyone has high speed connections why not just encode it at the max?
 
At 192 the difference is clearly audible on an MP3 player. In the end 10 MP3s roughly = the same track as .wav.
Check what sort of player the client uses.
I have a reasonable portable that plyas MP3 and WAV & it was only $40. I have an excellent player (ColorflyC3) that works a treat with wav (16 & 24) as well as FLAC etc etc for only $99.
Next the client will want you to mix for MP3 - don't get caught up in the clients storage problems.
If using MP3 I'll work at 320 - the best quality available in that format. Why not go for the best available in a format?
When downloading I search for FLAC 1st & then work my way down the MP3 rate list. I recently downloaded something at 192 because it wasn't available in any other form anywhere I could find after a couple of weeks of searching. the quality was poor but it was all there was.
The better the quality of the playback gear the more audible the difference - makes me wonder how & why iPod docks are so popular in new gear. After years of trying to present the best available - remember TDK's ads? - the market is about Lowest Common Denominator now. I think it comes from confusing the price of an product with the quality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
brassplyer said:
By definition the "optimum" is the highest bit rate at which you can encode. These when virtually everyone has high speed connections why not just encode it at the max?
Click to expand...

When there are two opposing considerations, such as file size and sound quality, optimum would mean the ideal balance between them. That wouldn't necessarily mean the best sound quality possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top