mp3 quality

^ that goes without saying ... but I still can enjoy listening to a 128kbps, ignoring the effects of the compression. If I really like it, I'll of course try to obtain the album and rip it in 256kbps mp3.

thellama73 wrote: I have always used 128kpbs and it sounds fine to me. I have known audiophiles who claim that anything less than 160 hurts their ears, but it doesn't bother me, plus it saves a load of hard disk space.

Some audiophiles even say that CD audio hurts their ears, so go figure.

oliverstoned wrote: "Say no to compression"? Even your good old Sony walkman uses compression ..." We are not talking about the same thing.

I was only saying that most consumer audio formats use compression. Even the vinyl record uses compression, as the bandwidth of information is lower than that of the original tapes.

Of course that's not the same as mp3, which analyses the audio data and selectively removes information. But the motivation is the same: To reduce the cost of the hardware needed to listen to the music.

So while I don't like what compression (especially mp3) is doing to the music, I accept it as a necessary "evil" if i want to carry 30 albums with me on my mobile player - and I'll stop using mp3 as soon as there are players who have 10x the storage capacity and allow me to use lossless compression.

Sacred 22 wrote: oliverstoned wrote: The higher the compression, the worst the sound.   you got that right   Just say NO to compression, because if you don't one day all music will be in some kind of compressed format and the death of high fidelity will be all over except the crying...........

"Say no to compression"? Even your good old Sony walkman uses compression ...

I think the key is to always only use the amount of compression that is necessary. My old mobile player could only play mp3s up to 192kbps, and my new one can play anything up to 320kbps. And I'll choose the next one (in 2+ years) so that it can play files in lossless formats.

So: Don't say "no", but say "as little compression as necessary".

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ that's true of course. But the quality also greatly depends on how the file was built. Like I said above ... there are some really great sounding 128kbp mp3s, and there also are some crappy sounding 192kbps mp3s.

^ As I said above, there are even more factors to be considered. Suppose you are using the LAME encoder (that's the default if you're using for example CDex), then you also need to pay attention to this:

- Is the CD drive configured properly ... or more precisely: Are you sure that it uses digital extraction? Analog extraction is very unlikely today, but may happen on old computers. Of course if you use analog extraction the result will sound crappy, as the signal is extracted using really cheap D/A converters, transfered through a crappy cable inside the computer and then converted to digital again.
- Is the extraction tool configured to use error detection? If not, the extracted audio may not be bit-correct ... there may be dropouts or subtle jitter-related errors.
- Is the encoder configured for high quality? With many extraction tools you can't configure this ... so use a proper tool like CDex, which enables you to tweak the LAME encoder settings. If you set it to very high quality, the conversion will take slightly more time. But especially when using VBR you get a much better result, because the encoder will decide more accurately which bitrate to use for the different parts of the track.

^ that's true of course. But the quality also greatly depends on how the file was built. Like I said above ... there are some really great sounding 128kbp mp3s, and there also are some crappy sounding 192kbps mp3s.

^ my previous player couldn't play anything beyond 192kbps ... I'm glad that my new one has no limitations (up to 320kbps), so I can listen to emusic.com files on it.

I most of the time use 192kbps which seems to be 'cd quality'

I find at 320 kbps the volume can be a little higher than usual and the sound is definitely less harsh on headphones.  But with limited disc space, then 128 or 160 are the best for me.