In the case of CD rip and Vinyl rip.
Except for the lossless, with only mp3.
For reference, let us know your opinion.
Too professional and technical explanation is except…
This topic will be the perfect answer exist?
I have never found a satisfactory answer myself in the past….
Advertisement
had70
twinspark
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
2012/02/01 at 4:10 AM
Pat
320 for constant bitrate, v0 for variable bitrate. Sitting around listening to the lower bitrates on laptop speakers compared to higher ones won’t seem that much different, but in headphones or a nice hi fi system, it will make all the difference. Cymbals especially in 192 sound like lasers sometimes.
2012/01/30 at 4:04 PM
lilycarolyn
Definitely 320 kps or flac, 192 kps is good though
2012/01/26 at 6:21 PM
DT
not that there’s much audible difference between any of them, but 320 is always a bit clearer an the way to go. FLAC takes too dang long to download
2012/01/27 at 2:20 AM
Kosta
u can convert FLAC to original wav and edit :
if it’s a vinyl u can fix skips, jumps, clicks, crackles, hiss, sharp, muffle….
if it’s a a cd u can equalize it as u like since sometimes cd are too sharp or too muffled
An album 320 is about 100 mb, flac 230 mb…it taked 2 more minutes to download
2012/01/23 at 1:08 AM
klaatune
320 is the ultimate spectrum that can be obtained in mp3 format.
2012/01/22 at 1:45 PM
starry
I thought 320 was the max bitrate you could have and so the best.
2012/01/22 at 12:32 AM
myles_hunter
For me it’s simple: I always use 256k Fraunhofer mp3 codec. The best German computer magazine (c’t, with exeption of “IX”) made a “test hearing” in 2000 with 13 persons (128k/256k/CD/wav). One of them was Gernot von Schultzendorff (sound engineer from the classic section of “Deutschen Grammophon” in the time when they had their own recording studios). Even the selftitled “best listeners” haven’t been able to recorgnize perfectly when it comes to find out the differenz between 256k and CD/wav. The differences are so small that non of the was a 100% “recognizer” – it was more a matter of personal hearing.
So, for me it’s 256k as the best compromise between quality and largeness. When I record and album for remastering I use a Dual Golden One with a MC System Van den Hull needle (have three more on stock), take my Yamaha MC Preamplifier that comes along with my amp and record it 24/96 to get the best result (Wavelab 7 is my software) to listen to the tracks I use a very analytic SE535 from shure (no place for monitor speakers).
2012/01/19 at 3:13 AM
Kosta
I made a test switching on my stereo a track (rich of instruments) from the mp3 192 and the original vinyl playng conteporaly and could not find any difference, so my fave bitrate is 192 for very clear and bright albums and 224 for those more rich in instrumental parts…
in my experience Fraunhofer MP3 Encoders (FHG) in WaveLab are much better sounding than lame…the encoding process is very slow, but gives better quality..i still haven’t found a better one…
2012/01/18 at 9:49 PM
gfdp99
I always prefer 256K to 320K CBR for both CD and vinyl. 192K is the lowest rate I will consider but I always prefer 256K or higher. I used to rip everything at 320K but have evolved to the point where the audio quality differences over 256K are not significant enough to my ears to warrant the extra file storage.
2012/01/18 at 8:25 PM
Bobby
no doubt 320 is preferred
2012/01/18 at 6:44 PM
John Deem
As far as lossy goes, I think the majority of people who come through here would prefer 320 constant bitrate in Dual-Stereo.
2012/01/18 at 11:54 AM
Danny B.
I am not offended by compressed formats at all. I would agree with Sergio that anything above 192 works for me. I think it provides a good listening experience when played on decent audio equipment.
2012/01/18 at 2:09 AM
jukka
LAME V0 (the highest vbr) is the best mp3 setting for considering quality & file sizes. sounds better than iTunes or other crappy 320cbr encodings, and basically LAME is designed for vbr. actually on most of private pir@te site, V0 always gets the highest d/l count in other various settings includes 320 & even flac. I know it’s not the perfect but I think if you want the BEST quality, should BUY CD like the original uploaders.
thanks for reading. and sorry for my bad English.
2012/01/17 at 8:32 PM
Sergio García
Good question! I use to say I like uncompressed formats like wav or aiff, but you can’t write metadata on them, so flac or alac would be my favourites. That said, when you have to go portable, you have to pick one codec and one setting for that codec. I make blind tests with my best gear anytime a new codec is available, and, as I’m 47 y.o. and my gear is a bit basic (I’m not rich) I’ve found aac 160k vbr as a codec and a bitrate enough for me. It’s something between 192 and 320k mp3. It’s indistinguibe from original for my ears and it saves a lot of space on my hard disks and iPods. I’m an audiophile but, if you can’t tell the difference between 160k vbr aac and a wav file, why choose the longer file if not for storing purposes? I know when it’s a 160k mp3 or a 128k mp3 or a 128k aac listening to the reverb of the cymbals for example. The sound is unstable for me at those rates, but I’m sure a younger ears and a better gear than mine can make a difference. Sorry for the boring thing, but this is a very interesting question.