what kpbs is The best?

P

PRiZ-one

New member
For instance when you have a song downloaded for 196 kpbs, it usuallly sounds better than 128 kpbs, but what about 320 kpbs, is that the best, I heard it's only because people use bad compressors or just suck at it. What's the deal, what is the best?

there is a difference right?

thanks!
 
the best is pure .wav... hehe. well, any mp3 will have worse quality than the originally recorded song in uncompressed form. if you want higher quality, go for the biggest kpbs number you can find.
 
I think 192 is a perfect tradeoff for file size and quality. You need studio monitors to hear the difference between the .wav and a 192kbs mp3 done with a Fraunhauffer codec. Even through studio monitors, I have not heard enough of a difference between 320 and 192 to justify the MUCH bigger file size for mp3's, especially for posting on the internet for people to download.

Ed
 
"You need studio monitors to hear the difference between the .wav and a 192kbs mp3 done with a Fraunhauffer codec"

yes, the quality of the encoder plays as big a part as the kbps rate.....
 
I agree with Sonusman. If you need to build MP3's you can't go wrong using the Fraunhauffer codec. In case your wondering how for free? Music Match Jukebox has a free download that will encode using this codec. There have been several comparison tests on the web and most agree this is the best way to go.
 
i also agree that 192 is the perfect tradeoff... 128 is shit, i can't even listen to it anymore
 
I prefer Variable Bit Rates (VBR) that average 150-160 kbps. Even with a "straight" 160 or 192 bit rate, there are often things like cymbal splashes that can get mangled. With a variable bit rate, when something like that happens, the bit rate goes up to compensate. Conversely, when there's nothing much happening, the bit rate goes way down, so the file size ends up being smaller.

I usually set my bit rate to a quality of 3 or 4 (in CDEx's LAME encoder, http://cdex.n3.net), then set the minimum bit rate to 32 kbps and the maximum to 224 kbps.
 
and the quality of the encoding done [comparatively]with Wavelab at 192kbps is...? good ...bad...equal??
 
I have no idea. I don't own or use Wavelab. But I have no doubt that the VBR-encoded file is smaller, and I've never heard any encoding artifacts in them.
 
IIRC, I read the results of a listening test somewhere on the internet, where not one out of a bunch of audiophiles participating in this test, claimed to hear any difference between a 256 kbps VBR LAME MP3 and the original. Supposedly better-sounding than a 320 kbps Fraunhofer MP3. I don't know what equipment they listened through, though.
 
Blind test anyone?

If anyone would be interested, I'd be more than happy to create a blind test of this. I could create MP3s using various codecs and bitrates (including VBR), then convert them back to wav files and have everyone see if they can tell the difference between the converted MP3s and the original source. It would be interesting to see the results.

If there's enough interest, I'll do it. Let me know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top