What effect does bit rate have on mp3s?

[Srikanth]

What effect does it have? Higher the bit rate, more the size. Isn't that true?

 

[urbantechie]

Larger the file size but better quality.

 

[Srikanth]

What's the average bitrate that gives good quality sound and goes easy on size too? How can i change the bitrate of an mp3?

 

[urbantechie]

It depends on which MP3 Encoder was used. You can downsize the bitrate but you can't make something that is suck better . I'm not even sure if you can change it.

 

[pen^2]

192 seems to be the happy medium for what i know...

 

[BCYL]

Mostly ppl use 192 or 128-bit...

 

[HaVoC]

Not all encoders are created equal. A crappy encoder at 192 can sound a LOT worse than a great quality encoder at 128. More bitrate means less compression for better sound quality at the expense of size.

 

[Moonbender]

At 128kbit most people can hear a difference between MP3 and uncompressed sound (if they try hard). At 196kbit only few people manage to do so. The vast majority of MP3s are 128kbit, but recently 196kbit is seen quite often, too. Higher bitrates are quite rare.

Converting a MP3 to a higher bitrate is not possible without the original, uncompressed music. That is, it is possible, but it would not raise the quality - once lost during compression, there is no way to regain the quality - that's why it is called LOSSY compression.
Converting a MP3 to a lower bitrate is possible, but not recommended. The artifacts (ie differences created due to lossy compression) of the MP3 you want to convert are made even worse. So, compressing an original to 128 and then 96kbit yields worse results than converting it from the original to 96kbits. Of course, you might not hear it, that can always happen with MP3s.

 

[erikiksaz]

but dood, just remember that you can't hear the difference between 192k and 128k through CRAPPY speakers. well maybe you could, but i wasn't able to. if you do get a nice set of speakers, 192k encoding through fraunhofer might even sound a little "dirty." heh, i just prefer cd's.

 

[erikiksaz]

but dood, just remember that you can't hear the difference between 192k and 128k through CRAPPY speakers. well maybe you could, but i wasn't able to. if you do get a nice set of speakers, 192k encoding through fraunhofer might even sound a little "dirty." heh, i just prefer cd's.

 

[Zucchini]

192kbs lame

 

[Gorgonzola]

160kbps is a good size to get if you are on a 56k modem, as the quality is noticably better than 128kbps, and the file sizes are too much bigger.

while i openly admit that i have very crapy speakers, and a not-so-great sound card, i can easily tell the difference between 128kbps and 160kbps/192kbps. if i am downloading mp3s i try to get 192kbps, but if i am ripping them i often go for 320kbps.

 

[Moonbender]

I am impressed by the extraordinary ears many of you have got! A (respectful) German computer mag made a test with people who rated themselves to be audiophiles. They played the orginal CD and - I think - 128kbit MP3s on highest-end hifi equipment. Most people couldn't dependently point out which sounds better.

 

[Gorgonzola]

i could pick out the difference between 128kbps and a cd very easily but, picking 320kbps apart from cd would be a different story.

 

[Workin']

Most people can tell the diff. between 128 kbps mp3 and the original CD even with their fingers in their ears!

 

[Snarko]

Actually, 90% of the 128kbps material was picked out.
At 256kbps, Fraunhofer or Lame mp3s were judged as equal in quality as the disc.
At 224kbps, some of the Lame mp3s were also judged equal.