Hi, i currently have all of my music stored in MP3 format at 320 kps. Is there any benefit from me changing this and what would you advise.
-
When should you upgrade your hi-fi? How to control ‘upgradeitis’
Is it worth changing MP3 @ 320kps
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
my collection seems to be getting bigger and bigger and i just want to make sure i have chosen the best format and if not should i change it now before i add anymore.
nads
Well-known member
what do you want from it?
i would re rip at the highest rate in flac.
then if i wanted any MP3 it would convert a copy. keeping the flac.
i would re rip at the highest rate in flac.
then if i wanted any MP3 it would convert a copy. keeping the flac.
I just dont want to get a bit further down the line with my collection, then someone say "you would have been better off using XXX format"
Am i right in thinking that MP3 is compatible with most programmes anyway where as a format like lossless is not.
Am i right in thinking that MP3 is compatible with most programmes anyway where as a format like lossless is not.
mark8par: Am i right in thinking that MP3 is compatible with most programmes anyway where as a format like lossless is not.
Correct. But I agree with above, rip to ALAC or FLAC (Storage is cheap) and make an MP3 copy of the whole library at the same time -- that way you have a lossless Library and another Library that plays on all platforms, and allows more tracks on an MP3 portable player at any one time.
Correct. But I agree with above, rip to ALAC or FLAC (Storage is cheap) and make an MP3 copy of the whole library at the same time -- that way you have a lossless Library and another Library that plays on all platforms, and allows more tracks on an MP3 portable player at any one time.
Alec
Well-known member
I believe a good 320 kbps MP3 to be nearly as good as a lossless file but I think i would still make losssless copies of everything if it were me.
I think 320kbps MP3s aren't that small. I got 10-16 MB MP3s from a 20-30 MB FLACs. Something around 1/2 of FLACs. Given the sound quality difference for serious listening, I don't think it worth it. For casual listening through portable MP3 players, flashdisk storages or so, I would stick with smaller size of 128kbps MP3s.
rardhian:I think 320kbps MP3s aren't that small. I got 10-16 MB MP3s from a 20-30 MB FLACs. Something around 1/2 of FLACs. Given the sound quality difference for serious listening, I don't think it worth it. For casual listening through portable MP3 players, flashdisk storages or so, I would stick with smaller size of 128kbps MP3s.
Sorry, but I disagree. Even on my iPhone I can tell if something was ripped at 192 or less, particularly in the bass notes and it is more noticeable on the HiFi. Anything at 256 and above it becomes difficult to tell. I suppose it depends on whether it is for casual listening or "listening".
Sorry, but I disagree. Even on my iPhone I can tell if something was ripped at 192 or less, particularly in the bass notes and it is more noticeable on the HiFi. Anything at 256 and above it becomes difficult to tell. I suppose it depends on whether it is for casual listening or "listening".
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
mark8par:If i was to change to FLAC would i need to re rip all of my current collection.
Afraid so.
Afraid so.
Well you'll need to rip the FLACs from the original audio CDs, not from your MP3 collections! But I guess you can do that later once the difference bothers you 
I think what you're trying to do is to save some space for storing your music is that so? As for listening on the go, I think 128kbps or 192kbps are fine. I never complained audio quality on the go, noises always distracts me from hearing clarity-clear cymbals and basslines. Not to mention I don't have some really good headphones as well.
Although I'm not sure of re-ripping your 320kbps MP3 to lower bitrate MP3s is really a good idea in terms of quality loss. It could probably cause more loss than ripping a FLAC to lower bitrate MP3s, I don't know.
I think what you're trying to do is to save some space for storing your music is that so? As for listening on the go, I think 128kbps or 192kbps are fine. I never complained audio quality on the go, noises always distracts me from hearing clarity-clear cymbals and basslines. Not to mention I don't have some really good headphones as well.
Although I'm not sure of re-ripping your 320kbps MP3 to lower bitrate MP3s is really a good idea in terms of quality loss. It could probably cause more loss than ripping a FLAC to lower bitrate MP3s, I don't know.
Dont really have a problem with space but from whats being said, at this point it might be best changing the format i use at the moment to flac then everything i save from now will be in that format, then if i want to change the format of the cd's copied i can do that later. I can then keep this as a master backup and change to another format to go on my PC.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
mark8par:
Dont really have a problem with space but from whats being said, at this point it might be best changing the format i use at the moment to flac then everything i save from now will be in that format, then if i want to change the format of the cd's copied i can do that later. I can then keep this as a master backup and change to another format to go on my PC.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
It depends really. When you rip to FLAC, you can then reconvert it to anything. An MP3 file is lossy so you can't convert it to one of the lossless formats. More and more devices in the future will play FLAC. And of course Apple devices will play ALAC which can be be converted from FLAC. I would say that FLAC is the way forward, unless you are only going to be using Apple products.
Dont really have a problem with space but from whats being said, at this point it might be best changing the format i use at the moment to flac then everything i save from now will be in that format, then if i want to change the format of the cd's copied i can do that later. I can then keep this as a master backup and change to another format to go on my PC.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
It depends really. When you rip to FLAC, you can then reconvert it to anything. An MP3 file is lossy so you can't convert it to one of the lossless formats. More and more devices in the future will play FLAC. And of course Apple devices will play ALAC which can be be converted from FLAC. I would say that FLAC is the way forward, unless you are only going to be using Apple products.
You can say that -- although the 320kbps ones are really the top of the line MP3s, which probably could open possibilities of poor support on some players, at least in the past.
Anyway I think the industry accepts them because MP3s are small, but unfortunately 320kbps ones aren't that small
Though nowadays storage gets cheaper and bandwidth gets higher, most people who don't (want to) care about the differences would probably left FLACs being interesting just for audiophiles
Anyway I think the industry accepts them because MP3s are small, but unfortunately 320kbps ones aren't that small
Though nowadays storage gets cheaper and bandwidth gets higher, most people who don't (want to) care about the differences would probably left FLACs being interesting just for audiophiles
Alantiggger
Well-known member
Alec
Well-known member
mark8par:
Dont really have a problem with space but from whats being said, at this point it might be best changing the format i use at the moment to flac then everything i save from now will be in that format, then if i want to change the format of the cd's copied i can do that later. I can then keep this as a master backup and change to another format to go on my PC.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
If you intend to make FLACs and then transcode to MP3 for use on your computer then I would just say "yes", but lots of ifs, ands, and buts can be introduced depending.
Dont really have a problem with space but from whats being said, at this point it might be best changing the format i use at the moment to flac then everything i save from now will be in that format, then if i want to change the format of the cd's copied i can do that later. I can then keep this as a master backup and change to another format to go on my PC.
One question though - if i am to choose a format for on my Pc am i right in thinking MP£ is the most flexible.
Thanks for your help with this, you learn something new every day.
If you intend to make FLACs and then transcode to MP3 for use on your computer then I would just say "yes", but lots of ifs, ands, and buts can be introduced depending.
Alec
Well-known member
Alantiggger:What is the better method for ripping cd's to Flac please ?
Winamp can rip FLACs pretty quickly and easily, and I believe Ripstation Micro DS can. Both are free. EAC is also free but a bit more complex to configure. dB Poweramp is not free, but can be used free for a trial period, and is pretty easy to configure.
Winamp can rip FLACs pretty quickly and easily, and I believe Ripstation Micro DS can. Both are free. EAC is also free but a bit more complex to configure. dB Poweramp is not free, but can be used free for a trial period, and is pretty easy to configure.
I'd have 1 copy in FLAC and then another copy in MP3 @ 192kbits VBR. Pointless having 1 copy in 320 and copy in FLAC as difference wont be really noticeable.
FLAC is lossless and then 192kbits is decent enough as smaller backup
FLAC is lossless and then 192kbits is decent enough as smaller backup
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Something is not right and I’m hoping a forum member will help me
- Started by Fuel4life1234
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram