mp3 bitrate question...

Adam.Heckman · 01-29-2004, 12:14 PM

Is there a bitrate of mp3s that matches the quality of a CD? Or is there inherent flaws in the mp3 format (range or whatever) that make it, by default, inferior to CDs?

Thanks in advance!!

dan fritzen · 01-29-2004, 12:41 PM

I read once that somewhere between 168 to 256kbits is CD quality, I like everythign 256 or 320 myself, although I have mp3's at 128 that sound more dynamic than others at 256. Not only is the bitrate important, but the encoder used as well. I use the one in DiscJuggler because it is free with the software, otherwise the add in one for Nero is good as well.

I am sure someone will reply with a more up to date test and give us a mroe precise answer.

FeisalK · 01-29-2004, 01:26 PM

IMO the very fact that MP3 is a compression method makes it inherently inferior to CD which is uncompressed PCM. It's not a flaw or anything its just the way it's made.

However, it also depends on the resolution of the system playing back the MP3. On most portable MP3 playback systems (and probably mid-range as well) 128kb is sufficient. And at 256kbps or more (on an average system) you will most likely not be able to discern the difference between MP3 and uncompressed PCM, so it will sound 'just as good' as CD.

PaulP · 01-29-2004, 01:28 PM

Lame is considered one of the best encoders. I encode my music at 192 with the latest Lame codec, with Stereo and HQ settings, and it sounds maybe even better than on CD

On this note, the new AAC format should be even better than MP3 - Winamp 5 supports it, and has AAC de[n]coding capabilities (maybe only in Pro version). It's supposedly has the same compression ratio as MP3 but sounds much better - supposedly a 128 AAC sounds like a 192 MP3...

robertLP · 01-29-2004, 02:19 PM

Anyone use the iTunes encoder? How does it rate compare to LAME?

**HTF Ads**

Angelo.M · 01-29-2004, 02:44 PM

Is there a bitrate at which mp3 becomes transparent (no audible difference versus redbook CD) to your ears? Only you can answer through trial and error.

It's a compression format, so information is lost. Whether or not that makes an audible difference is up to you.

RobBenton · 01-29-2004, 06:01 PM

Around 256kb it becomes very hard to tell the difference between an mp3 and the original CD. Some people can't tell the difference at 192kb Just try a few different things and see which you like best.

ken nomimashita · 01-29-2004, 06:24 PM

it really depends on the person. mp3's sound different somehow to me. i cant really explain it though. i guess its the software.

PhilBoy · 01-30-2004, 08:45 AM

I only use a 100% Variable Bit Rate...

The song files in size work out to about 1/3, but even with a very good pair of cans it is hard to tell the difference between mp3 and .wav.

Thomas Newton · 01-30-2004, 11:12 AM

You lose quality because MP3 is a lossy compression format. You trade quality for higher compression ratios.

There are lossless compression formats, like .ZIP and .SIT and Meridian Lossless Packing, but they aren't necessarily designed for real-time encoding or playback. At best, you can expect maybe 2:1 lossless compression, where a low-to-medium-quality 128 Kbps MP3 gives you ~10:1 compression.

Jonathan Dagmar · 01-30-2004, 05:33 PM

Usiing Windows media is better than Mp3, and support for Windows Media is pretty goof these days among hardware.

With Windows Media audio 9 you can get the same quality as MP3 at half the bit-rate, so it is a much superior format.

As for what bit-rate MP3 becomes indecipherable from CD? I guess that depends on what kind of system you are listening on. On a portable player Mp3 is a godsens because it can be so small, but when i play mp3 on my home theater i think they sound terrible.

BrianMB · 01-30-2004, 05:40 PM

For lossless compression there are:

MonkeysAudio

FLAC

.SHN

They all only compress a music file in half, but hard drives are cheap