• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

128 Kbps MP3s Suck! Why can't everybody just encode at 192?

T

Thegonagle

Diamond Member
I generally don?t even touch 128 Kbps MP3s. They suck! They usually sound like crap, so I only take them if nothing better pops up. The problem is, I get very few K@zaa results when I search for MP3s at 192 or better.

Got any suggestions as to where I could look for more results for better quality files? Although I?m no stranger to the old IRC/FTP method, and usenet, I prefer P2P these days.

Of course I want something that will work without spyware (or with spyware removed).

Oh, and I'm getting a Mac G3 powerbook soon (for free), so I'd love to know of any great software for the Mac, too.

What'all y'all think?

EDIT: Any Fast Track compatible clients made for Mac? 😀
 
Make your own.

When I'm done with the discs I'm working on now I should have 55 gb of mp3's, 95% of which were ripped by me & my roommate - All at 320 VBR.

They take up less space than 256 CBR, & they sound better.

Viper GTS
 
Originally posted by: OS
I think a 128K mp3 using a good encoder sounds fine.
Click to expand...

Why bother?

It's not like storage space matters much anymore.

If I have a need for lower quality (ie portable MP3 players with crappy headphones) I can always re-encode at a lower bitrate.

Viper GTS
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: OS
I think a 128K mp3 using a good encoder sounds fine.
Click to expand...

Why bother?

It's not like storage space matters much anymore.

If I have a need for lower quality (ie portable MP3 players with crappy headphones) I can always re-encode at a lower bitrate.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...


Well, I haven't made any MP3s in a long time, but yeah if I was gonna encode now I'd use 256K.

I guess I'm just saying when I'm listening, I don't think, yup, this song is definitely 128K and not 256K.

 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i'll tell ya what sucks. 128kbs mp3 converted to cd then converted to 256kbs mp3🙂
Click to expand...

Oh yuck. I cringe!

Yeah, I should be making my own, and I very often do, but I also like to look for the classic/pop stuff, the stuff that I probably wouldn't buy, like the Rolling Stones, or "Jenny, Jenny, who can I turn to?" (867-5309). You know what I mean.
 
All of my CD backup have been 256 or 320.
Yes, 128 sux, but majority of people still stuck with dial up.
So we have no choice in this matter.
Use WinMX to search for better bitrate without spyware.
 
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
MP3s....hahahahaha

🙂 <--click

mp3s are the suck. if you are going to encode lossy, at least use Vorbis or MusePack
*waits for viper gts*
Click to expand...

Don't you use logitech z560s? Like you're going to notice a difference anyways.

 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
MP3s....hahahahaha

🙂 <--click

mp3s are the suck. if you are going to encode lossy, at least use Vorbis or MusePack
*waits for viper gts*
Click to expand...

Don't you use logitech z560s? Like you're going to notice a difference anyways.
Click to expand...
Snagging some etys + a revo this summer if i play my cards right....never having to rerip = <3
 
I don't generally download mp3s if they're below 160, and I rip at 256k.
 
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
MP3s....hahahahaha

🙂 <--click

mp3s are the suck. if you are going to encode lossy, at least use Vorbis or MusePack
*waits for viper gts*
Click to expand...

Don't you use logitech z560s? Like you're going to notice a difference anyways.
Click to expand...
Besides the overwhelming bass, the Z560s are still amongst the best sub $200 PC speakers around. I think paired with a good sound card, you could notice the difference.
 
Originally posted by: manly
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
MP3s....hahahahaha

🙂 <--click

mp3s are the suck. if you are going to encode lossy, at least use Vorbis or MusePack
*waits for viper gts*
Click to expand...

Don't you use logitech z560s? Like you're going to notice a difference anyways.
Click to expand...
Besides the overwhelming bass, the Z560s are still amongst the best sub $200 PC speakers around. I think paired with a good sound card, you could notice the difference.
Click to expand...
a difference between a high quality lossy file and a lossless file on z560s?

uh, no.
 
Originally posted by: NuclearFusi0n
Originally posted by: manly
Besides the overwhelming bass, the Z560s are still amongst the best sub $200 PC speakers around. I think paired with a good sound card, you could notice the difference.
Click to expand...
a difference between a high quality lossy file and a lossless file on z560s?

uh, no.
Click to expand...
Guess I don't know much about PC speakers then. 😛

I wasn't exactly drawing a comparison between HQ MP3s and the lossless source though; maybe more like the distinction between a mid-quality MP3 and lossless, since outside of the relatively few geeks who encode with LAME at the highest VBR settings, most MP3s out there are hardly "high quality".

How would I go about evaluating sound quality going from crappy SB Live to nVidia Soundstorm? Any good audio demos out there? I'm not really a discriminating listener.
 
The reason why alot of people encode at 128K is because that is the default for many encoders nowadays and has been for a long time.
 
I "understand" your complaint... I hate downloading crappy quality MP3s (especially half of a song or a poorly encoded one--these are worse than having them encoded with a good encoder at 128Kbps).

BUT, if you're enough of an audiophile to notice the difference, you should probably OWN the source to begin with. And my "source" stays at home--my car now has an MP3 CD player... so I make 192Kbps CBR encodings to listen to in my car. But I really can't notice much of a difference above 128 in my car--why? Road noise, etc. Sure, sitting still, I can..... but not driving down the highway. Much is the same with portable MP3 players--people are jogging, not listening for the nuances of the music.

Think of it this way: 128Kbps is for you to "preview" the music. You have a copy of it. Its listenable. If you really like it, go buy it. 🙂 I'm all for peer-2-peer for preview/review (I'm not one of the "KaZaA is for thieves!" zealots... but if you like it enough to want "better quality", support the artist and go buy it).

P.S. One major reason for 128Kbps encodings is that its SO common. My mom encoded her entire CD collection for use in her car. She used the default settings. Luckily, she was using EAC LAME.... but it is 128Kbps.
 
192Kbps for me. I've encoded a bunch. I can tell a difference between 128Kbps and higher. I have a tough time between 160 and 192 though... hard pressed to tell a difference. In fact, with headphones and a blind test I'm not sure I could. Over PC Speakers (even decent ones) I can't. But... since 192 isn't much more space I use that when ripping. Always CBR. The VBR doesn't save much space either and for some reason it just sounds off when I listen to 'em ... although that I'm sure is my imagination.

IRC is a good option for hunting. A little more work though.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top