Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: crappy bitrates




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    From what i can see (actually hear), most ppl spend loads of money (hundreds$) on sound equipment for computers. Then they download crappy bitrate music like 96, 128 and 160kbps and think they are hearing the best digital sound. And really music on their machines just sounds terrible.
    I never download anything other than 320kbps mp3 or 1411kbps wave.
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    315

    Default

    Since MP3 and wave are different formats, u cannot compare thier bitrates in the way u are. AS far as I know, the mp3 equivalent to a Cd is 192kbps.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    I'm not comparing bitrates between file types. I am mearly stating that the end result in sound has a huge difference. Try ripping the same song in all the different bitrates and listen to them, its obvious. And most ppl dont see the relevance, but still think throwing money at it makes it sound better.
    Just like when cd's came out, ppl (like almost everybody) thought/thinks the sound was and is the best possable.
    Well being an audiophile, i know for a fact that thats not true. My technics 1200 t.t. w/shure cart. blows away most cd players i have ever heard, had or have.
    Just like anything else, you usually get out what u put in.
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    thats great..but mp3s are just a good way to share music, audiophiles...smart ppl would buy dvd audio..newbie:)

  5. #5
    Beefy Guest

    Default

    I can't remember exactly what the magic number is for MP3 compression, but anything over that number simply uses over-sampling, which mixes the segment both before and after to make up for what wasn't there... I think it's either 128kbps or 160kbps. Anything more is altered.

    Example (really dodgy, but you should get the picture):

    CD original:

    0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1

    Oversampled MP3 (using twice as many samples as CD):

    0 .5 1 .5 0 .5 1 .5 0 0 0 .5 1 1 1 0.5 0 .5 1 .5 0 .5 1

    Hopefully that made some sense. If not, I'll either find a link or whip up a proper diagram to make sense.

    Personally, I rip stuff at 160kbps. MP3 will never sound the same as CD and I accept that and am happy with the 160kbps quality.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    192 owns;)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    322

    Default

    You call yourself an audiophile... *humph* Ogg Vorbis *****es! Ogg! Check out my sig :) Not the highest quality, but they sure sound better than friggin-darn mp3 equivalents!
    Box:
    [Mobo] Asus A7N8X w/ Modified 1003 Uber BIOS w/ Custom Boot logo
    [CPU] Athlon XP 2200+ Thoroughbred
    [Memory] 512 Samsung PC3200 DDR400 w/ Copper Heatsink(s)
    [Video Card] Geforce 3 ti200 128 DDR Special Gold Edition

    Cooling
    [Case] All aluminum Skyhawk case w/ custom cut blowhole
    [HSF] Volcano 11 Xaser Edition
    [Northbridge] ThermalTake Crystal Orb
    [Southbridge] Aluminum Northbridge heatsink attatched

    Operating System:
    [OS] Windows XP Pro w/ SP1

    Are you sick of poor quality 128k mp3's that sound inferior to regular CD's you buy in the store? Do you long for the exact sound of a CD with absolutly no quality loss, and at practically half the size of a normal CD? CD's get scratched all the time, and FLAC is great for archiving all those good copies of your classic rock, and backing them up to save forever. FLAC unlike mp3, or ogg vorbis is what is called a lossless format. This means that no quality whatsoever is lost from the origianl disk. Lossy formats such as ogg vorbis, wmv, and moreover mp3 are usually flat sounding, and full of hissing and dullness because they discard and literally throw out important information that controls how good the CD will sound. Using FLAC will ensure the crystal-clear clarity that you can expect from a freshly opened CD. Instead of flimsy CD cases that snap and CD's that scratch easily, and are inevitably summoned to a poor scratched up death; FLAC files can be stored in a tough metal box known as your Hard Disk. FLAC putting life back into digital audio. If you own legit copies of CD's and seek for them pre-FLAC'd for all your digital listening needs please shoot me a PM for more information.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default

    I supose i forgot so add that i only have 1 downloaded song on my system. I only rip stuff i own, to do otherwise would be copyright infringement(warez). And very rarely download music anymore(the novelty wore off). Except the odd song for the wife's mp3 discman. And upon playback of ripped stuff, the difference is obvious between different bit rates. Unless one was quite deaf, they would notice right away.
    I wonder if anyone knows that i was refering to a turntable and not some model of technics cd player. U see, 99% of turntable users did not even calibrate the downweight, which resulted in bad sounding vinyl after a few or even 1 play/s. I use a digital scale to calibrate it at exactly 1.75grams any more and damage will happen, any less and the cartridge will record artifacts on the vinyl as it plays(crackle). In the day when i used to setup tt's lots, the weight was often off by a few grams from the indicator on the tonearm(fatal for vinyl)

    Take a cd or vinyl song like eg. :Pink-dont let me get me, or G&R-patience,or metallica-whiskey in the jar,or Def leppard-do u want to get rocked. These are songs that are clear with powerful signals Then try ripping it in 96, 128, 160, 192,and 320kbps all with the same program eg. cyberlink power 3mp encoder. Then put them all on an mp3 cd and listen to it on a compatable car or house stereo. And u will see what I am talking about, the garble on the bass and highs gets noticeably worse as the bitrate gets lower. And not a wal-mart special stereo either.

    90% of my personal music listening is with vinyl.(gotta love that smooth natural sound) remember vinyl has no limitations of original bitrate or quality.:cheers:
    athlon xp-m@2456mhz(12x204)
    tt aquariusII liquid cooled/ arctic silver ceramique
    asus a7n8xe-dlx
    thermaltake xaserIII lanfire
    bfg 6800gt
    seagate sataII 250gb/seagate 7200rpm 160gb ide
    samsung dvdrw
    2x1024 kingston hyper-x pc3200/ windows xp pro sp3
    logitech mx518/ logitech wingman rumble
    2x samsung 955df 19"/ canon i960
    creative x-fi fatal1ty 64mb/ altec lansing 251-5.1
    mushkin 550w

    opteron 146 @ 2850 (10x285)
    DFI infinity nf4 ultra
    thermaltake tsunami dream -black
    seagate sataII 500gb
    evga 8600gt oc ssc edition
    samsung sata dvd-rw
    2x1024 ocz black
    logitech ifeel/ nec accusync 75f
    ocz fatal1ty 550w

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    539

    Default

    as far as i know, CD quality in mp3 format is 320kbps.

    I used to rip at 128, now at 192...anything over that and the files get too damn big

    i d/l a 3.5min song, 320kbps = 10mb

    but yes, wav and mp3 are two totally different formats so u cant really compare.
    MSN Messenger - handy481@hotmail.com
    DC++ - handy481 :: Sweden Xperience :: BootCamp 02 :: Revolution xShare 01 :: Mp3Heaven

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fincastle, IN, USA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default

    I rip mp3's at 128kbps, but I put those on my MP3 player. I normally rip at 192, those are all on my HD. I do notice a sound quality difference between the two, but for the mp3 plaer, ive only got 80megs pf space, compared to 120gigs on my hard drive. So I jkust rip size accordingly really

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •