Bitrates
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
John Duncan
Well-known member
- Jan 8, 2008
- 2,034
- 30
- 19,720
John Duncan
Well-known member
- Jan 8, 2008
- 2,034
- 30
- 19,720
Though looking at your other post, do you mean what's tolerable on an iPod or what's tolerable played though the stereo?
I'd agree with 192 as well. I've got some older Itunes purchased stuff in 128 I can't say that it offends me to be honest but will happily upgrade it when Apple give me the chance.
However, if you've got the storage space I'd probably go with 256 or lossless. The downside with lossless is that you will fit much less music on your Ipod which is a bummer if you are used to taking all your music with you. You can sort of get round this by managing either 2 libraries (one lossless and one at another bitrate) or by managing duplicates of songs in your library (again one lossless and one at another bitrate). Either of those options is a faff.
However, if you've got the storage space I'd probably go with 256 or lossless. The downside with lossless is that you will fit much less music on your Ipod which is a bummer if you are used to taking all your music with you. You can sort of get round this by managing either 2 libraries (one lossless and one at another bitrate) or by managing duplicates of songs in your library (again one lossless and one at another bitrate). Either of those options is a faff.
Lossless all the way! Storage issues are not a concern on the computer as you could easily get a 500gb hard drive for around £50.
My only issue would be my 8gb ipod nano, however I use media monkey which automatically downsamples my library to 256 on the fly.
Couldn't keep up with 2+ librarys on itunes!
My only issue would be my 8gb ipod nano, however I use media monkey which automatically downsamples my library to 256 on the fly.
Couldn't keep up with 2+ librarys on itunes!
Come on, 128kbps is tolerable, sure it'll lack depth, definition and character; the essence of why we're on these forums but to say it's intolerable is something of a Thatcherism.
al7478:
the_lhc:If "tolerable" means "I don't want it anywhere near me", then yes it's tolerable. Everything I've got is lossless.
And it is your money and your time and energy, so if it makes you feel better, dear...
Not sure I really follow you to be honest, all I did was select a different codec when I was ripping my CDs, didn't take any more time or cost any more money?
I mean Octopo even said it himself, it'll lack depth, character and definition, so I don't really see how that IS tolerable, it would just make me switch off, ergo it's intolerable, no?ÿ
the_lhc:If "tolerable" means "I don't want it anywhere near me", then yes it's tolerable. Everything I've got is lossless.
And it is your money and your time and energy, so if it makes you feel better, dear...
Not sure I really follow you to be honest, all I did was select a different codec when I was ripping my CDs, didn't take any more time or cost any more money?
I mean Octopo even said it himself, it'll lack depth, character and definition, so I don't really see how that IS tolerable, it would just make me switch off, ergo it's intolerable, no?ÿ
I encode most of my stuff at AAC 320Kbps 44.100 Hz
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Lossless
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Lossless
Pmaninit:
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Losslessÿ
"i.e. Aphex Twin"ÿ
Care to elaborate?ÿ
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Losslessÿ
"i.e. Aphex Twin"ÿ
Care to elaborate?ÿ
the_lhc:al7478:
the_lhc:If "tolerable" means "I don't want it anywhere near me", then yes it's tolerable. Everything I've got is lossless.
And it is your money and your time and energy, so if it makes you feel better, dear...
Not sure I really follow you to be honest, all I did was select a different codec when I was ripping my CDs, didn't take any more time or cost any more money?
I mean Octopo even said it himself, it'll lack depth, character and definition, so I don't really see how that IS tolerable, it would just make me switch off, ergo it's intolerable, no?
I'm just being silly. I do, tho, think 320kbps mp3s are perfectly acceptable, if well encoded, for all but the most analytical of listening sessions, plus its compatible with everything, pretty much.
I have a lot of encodeoing to do, however, and i will be making sure i have lossless copies too.
the_lhc:If "tolerable" means "I don't want it anywhere near me", then yes it's tolerable. Everything I've got is lossless.
And it is your money and your time and energy, so if it makes you feel better, dear...
Not sure I really follow you to be honest, all I did was select a different codec when I was ripping my CDs, didn't take any more time or cost any more money?
I mean Octopo even said it himself, it'll lack depth, character and definition, so I don't really see how that IS tolerable, it would just make me switch off, ergo it's intolerable, no?
I'm just being silly. I do, tho, think 320kbps mp3s are perfectly acceptable, if well encoded, for all but the most analytical of listening sessions, plus its compatible with everything, pretty much.
I have a lot of encodeoing to do, however, and i will be making sure i have lossless copies too.
Octopo:Pmaninit:
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Lossless
"i.e. Aphex Twin"
Care to elaborate?
Elaborate? Well music that I think gains resolution through having lossless, for example the artist mentioned above, I encode in lossless.........
Some stuff (i.e. Aphex Twin) I'll do at Apple Lossless
"i.e. Aphex Twin"
Care to elaborate?
Elaborate? Well music that I think gains resolution through having lossless, for example the artist mentioned above, I encode in lossless.........
idc:The difference between MP3 and lossless is more noticeable when listening on headphones than sounddock.
Well this the thing, I don't own an mp3 player or dock of any sort, I stream music to my amp via Sonos, so I want the best sound quality possible, which is why I don't use mp3.
Well this the thing, I don't own an mp3 player or dock of any sort, I stream music to my amp via Sonos, so I want the best sound quality possible, which is why I don't use mp3.
idc
Well-known member
- Jan 2, 2008
- 1,143
- 117
- 19,370
the_lhc:
idc:The difference between MP3 and lossless is more noticeable when listening on headphones than sounddock.
Well this the thing, I don't own an mp3 player or dock of any sort, I stream music to my amp via Sonos, so I want the best sound quality possible, which is why I don't use mp3.
My post was a response to blackcabmal the OP and to reiterate JohnDuncan's reply which was, depends what you listen to your music on. I am re-importing my CDs at lossless and have given up meantime buying downloads until the quality goes up and prices go down.
idc:The difference between MP3 and lossless is more noticeable when listening on headphones than sounddock.
Well this the thing, I don't own an mp3 player or dock of any sort, I stream music to my amp via Sonos, so I want the best sound quality possible, which is why I don't use mp3.
My post was a response to blackcabmal the OP and to reiterate JohnDuncan's reply which was, depends what you listen to your music on. I am re-importing my CDs at lossless and have given up meantime buying downloads until the quality goes up and prices go down.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Question Suggestions for foundational parts of a longer term vinyl setup- Latest: RTHerringbone
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram