Ripping CDs: 128Kbps Vs 192Kbps
Posts: 117
Visited by: 93 users
Original post
Posted by Baz Anderson, 12.05.2007 - 19:08
But what about file size, I know hard drives are getting bigger and bigger, but when you are dealing with hundreds or even thousands of albums this makes a huge difference.
I would, I guess, have getting on for one thousand albums on my computer and they are all ripped at 128Kbps and in total they take up getting on for 40GB of my hard drive space and have no problems with their quality at all - although I am not comparing them to the same files ripped at 192Kbps.
Is there anyone else out there that actually rips at 128Kbps or is 128Kbps becoming more of a thing of the past now people have more hard disc space in their computers?
All opinions welcome.
Poll
Which Do You Prefer?
> 192Kbps
40
192Kbps
33
128Kbps
13
< 128Kbps
2
Total votes: 88
| Baz Anderson Staff Posts: 13254  |
hmm yes indeed.. all the experiments I have read about with "change blindness" - like "inattentional blindness" have been with things the participants haven't seen before and have no previous knowlegde as to how things will be so indeed, if they are songs you do know well, then maybe you will be able to tell a difference - if you actually can tell a difference.. it brings me back to the point of if someone listens to something at 192kbps - then they will, almost like a placebo as you say, honestly believe it sounds better quality then at 128kbps - even if their human ears are incabable of hearing the miniscule differences in quality
Loading...
|
| Ernis 狼獾 Posts: 6815  |
Well....I chose to rip my CDs at variable bit rate, thus every song will have a bit rate of its own....though some previously downloaded songs already have variable bit rate....I can't actually tell the difference between any of them....as long as I hear the music normally without any troubles I'm glad with it...
Loading...
|
| KryptoN imperceptible Posts: 634  |
Written by Ernis on 10.07.2007 at 01:49 I'm not sure whether you meant the correct thing or if you haven't fully understood VBR. So no, each of the songs won't have their own constant bit rate. Variable bit rate means that the rate is dynamic through the file. So all of the songs will have all kinds of bit rates usually between 128 and 320 to match the needs for each part of the song. Completely silent parts normally go much below 128 kbps because silence doesn't need any data. I'd be surprised if you could tell the difference, because essentially the VBR quality is equal to 320 kbps constant bit rate (CBR). VBR is pretty much the best choice (that combines high quality and low file size) for mp3 files.
Loading...
|
| Ernis 狼獾 Posts: 6815 |
@Krypton...well....thing is that my mp3 player displays the bit rate...it's usually a number or VBR...when I rip CDs I chose VBR....however....ripped mp3s are never VBR but have numbers....for instance if I play some files I downloaded from Soulseek, then I'll have VBR displayed...not always....but sometimes....I hope I explained well enough....my player displays the bit rate which is usually a number but sometimes there are letters VBR instead...
Loading...
|
| KryptoN imperceptible Posts: 634 |
Written by Ernis on 10.07.2007 at 02:57 Most players I've used indicate the VBR encoding with changing bit rate display (the number on the display changes all the time as the song is playing). It is possible that the files you have ripped are not actually encoded in VBR like the encoding software says, because as you said some files show up as VBR and some as numbers. I'm quite certain that the plain number display means that it's CBR (contant bitrate) and not VBR.
Loading...
|
| Alex Smith Posts: 167  |
Loading...
|
| Ernis 狼獾 Posts: 6815 |
I don't remember either and I have no idea if this helps....one should try open the "copy from CD" thing on Windows Media Player and then there should be some options about it.....
Loading...
|
| Hamird Lieutenant Posts: 2564  |
192kb. more than it is just waste of capacity. 192kb its good enough to hear all voices. and i rip my cds with Realplayer (and Sonicstage for my Walkman)... Real is better than Wmedia player
Loading...
|
| metaldazza Account deleted |
|
| Tod_Engel Posts: 159  |
I usually prefer quality over quantity. Most of my ripped albums are between 192-320 kbit with variable bitrate. There isn't a big difference between 128 kbit and 320 kbit. Higher quality is more similar to Audio CD quality, that's why I prefer it. Flacs could be more useful, but that audio format takes room on hard drive and I just don't have that much room on my computer. Still, Cds are the best way to find music with good audio quality.
Loading...
|
| selken Irreligious Posts: 949  |
Written by Alex Smith on 10.07.2007 at 16:19 use this it seem to be the best program out there to do it. I use AIMP, but this one is very easy to use.
---- 
Loading...
|
| TOUGHEST MEMBER Posts: 3626  |
320 Kbps is my fav bitrate, the more the bitrate the higher the quality of music sound.
Loading...
|
| Alex Smith Posts: 167 |
Written by selken on 01.04.2008 at 22:39 Thank you!!!
Loading...
|
| diSEMBOWELMENT Account deleted |
|
| Houssem Xul Account deleted |
|
| Metalhead2 Skinhead1 Posts: 271  |
Loading...
|
| Necrogeddon Born Too Late Posts: 730  |
well generally i rip at 128 cos my hard drive is tiny only 40GB. however if i have a favourite album that i want in really good quality , ill do it at 320 for ultimate quality. i think 192 is kinda an optimum bit rate, its isnt so big that hardly any songs will go on my player and its not so small the quality is shit.
---- 'I wish you all had one neck and that I had my hands on it.'
Loading...
|
| Aei Ontos Account deleted |
|
| THE_BLACK_GOD Account deleted |
|
| ToMegaTherion Posts: 718  |
I strongly prefer 192 or more, 128 you don't notice so much the difference until you turn the volume up. or if you are listening of big speekers. I used to do 128 all the time, until i got a decent size hard-drive now 192 all the way, or more sometimes.
Loading...
|
| Derwood Posts: 511  |
320 kbps or don't bother. I'm still on a quest for a car stereo that plays FLACs. I despise iPods because they cut everything to 160 which is just too low.
---- You can't fight evil with a macaroni duck!
Loading...
|
| Jan Posts: 247  |
Tbh I had not really thought much about this. I rip all cds to acc with itunes - and most often listen to music from my pc (high end earphones) or on my ipod. I checked and the itunes setting are 128kbps (mono) / 256kbps (stereo)... So does this mean that I rip in 128kbps or what?
Loading...
|
| thesabbathfan Posts: 410  |
Loading...
|
| Elio Red Nightmare Posts: 4920  |
I don't even download stuff under 192kbps anymore... 320 or FLAC ftw
Loading...
|
| Ag Fox Angel No More Elite Posts: 4774  |
Definitely 320... i don't have enough disk space for flac or ape and ipods don't support lossless quality, but I can't really tell the difference b/w 320 and flac, so it's okay for me
---- loves 小巫
Loading...
|
| Brogkul Posts: 20  |
All my faves get 320, the rest are 256. But nothing beats the actual CD or a flac. At first I used 128, but over the years I realized I was missing quality, mostly on toms and splashes. I get 192 or 128 only when theres no other possibility, and under 128 is just horrible.
---- "The Sly One"
Loading...
|
| Raiden Down Under Staff Elite Posts: 8292  |
Well I think 192kbps is the perfect compromise between quality and hard drive space usage. In the beginning I did rip at 128 but I found 192 to be a better sound and the total file size wasn't too bad. I do have some 320k mp3s but I don't find the quality to be that much better for the massive amount of space they take up.
---- "Scream for me Melbourne!!!!" - Bruce Dickinson "I don't see any god up here" - Yuri Gagarin (while in orbit, 1961)
Loading...
|