What bit rate do you sample/import into iTunes
I only just found out that you can go custom in prefs and set importing rate to 320 kbps
I was doing it at 192...
Will I notice a lot of difference in sound quality as I am not that impressed with the quality at 192...I think it is not that great...I am sure file size will be alot more but thats okay I dont need 2000 songs in there at once....
In custom settings what is USE Variable Bit Rate Encoding?? (VBR)
I have 320kbps
quality highest with VBR switched off
Sample rate 48.000
Stereo
Normal stereo mode SHOULD I use joint stereo?
Smart encoding adjustments is on (is that a good idea?)
Filter Frequencies below 10hz is on (is that a good idea?)
Thanks in advance - Like I say I find 192 too squashed a sound...and in my car it sounds nowehere near as dynamic as with a CD player/mini disk etc
Thanks
Jools
I was doing it at 192...
Will I notice a lot of difference in sound quality as I am not that impressed with the quality at 192...I think it is not that great...I am sure file size will be alot more but thats okay I dont need 2000 songs in there at once....
In custom settings what is USE Variable Bit Rate Encoding?? (VBR)
I have 320kbps
quality highest with VBR switched off
Sample rate 48.000
Stereo
Normal stereo mode SHOULD I use joint stereo?
Smart encoding adjustments is on (is that a good idea?)
Filter Frequencies below 10hz is on (is that a good idea?)
Thanks in advance - Like I say I find 192 too squashed a sound...and in my car it sounds nowehere near as dynamic as with a CD player/mini disk etc
Thanks
Jools
Comments
Assuming you mean MP3s (as I read your post, you do mean MP3s), anything over 256Kpbs is usualy just wasted disk space, you probably won't be able to hear the compression artifacts past that. Even then, most people can't tell the difference with anything over 192Kpbs due to the usual ambient noise, the quality of their speakers, etc. Maybe your car is quiet enough and the speaker system good enough to hear the more limited audio range and the distortions. I'd say try 256 and see if it floats your boat.
VBR will essentially try to find the "quiet" areas of a recording and save space in the file by lowering the bitrate in those places since less of the audio range is acutally used. I don't have a complete understanding, I just know thatitmakes your files smaller but can eat more processor time to play back and takes longer to encode.
I can't tell you about joint stereo or the other two options. You usually can't hear anything below 20Hz, so filtering out stuff below 10Hz probably just means smaller files, unless of course you want to "feel" your bass a bit more.
Originally posted by kittylitterdesign
I have 320kbps
quality highest with VBR switched off
Sample rate 48.000
Stereo
Normal stereo mode SHOULD I use joint stereo?
Smart encoding adjustments is on (is that a good idea?)
Filter Frequencies below 10hz is on (is that a good idea?)
Thanks in advance - Like I say I find 192 too squashed a sound...
Jools
Your sample rate is *wrong*, which is more than likely contributing to squashed sound you are experiencing. It should be 44.1kHz.
Joint stereo tries to combine stereo information that is the same in both tracks, giving more encoding room for actual musical information. This is useful in lower bitrates. At higher bitrates (Say 224 or higher) you may as well just use Normal Stereo.
VBR will dynamically allocate more room in passages that need it, less room in those that don't. Probably unncecessary if you're ripping at really high rates.
Rip a few tracks and use your ears, that's really the only way to decide what's best for you.
I hope that's helpful. Cheers!
Jools
Originally posted by kittylitterdesign
is 44.1hz deffo the one to choose - How come 48,000 is WRONG???
CDs are encoded at 44.1kHz, so assuming you're ripping from CDs, 44.1kHz is appropriate. If you're ripping from some other type of source, like say... DATs... you may need to change the sample rate.
Filter <10Hz - Human hearing only goes down to ~20Hz but you can still feel lower frequencies with decent equipment. I'd tick it unless you feel strongly about it.
Sampling rate should be left at auto - iTunes is smart enough to use the same sample rate as the source material. Resampling is bad.
I would recommend using the highest quality VBR mode with the bitrate set to 128 (in VBR mode this is a minimum bitrate) and use Stereo rather than Joint Stereo, which is more suited to low bitrates. This should get the best quality without needlessly sacrificing file size.
The only drawback with VBR is that some portables require CBR, and CBR works better for streaming. I'm guessing neither applies to you.
For me AAC 160kpbs, works like a charm :-)
g
From what I've understood up until now, VBR only goes up, not down, from the bit rate that you choose, so that when you choose a bit rate, you are choosing a minimum bit rate, and complex passages of music that are tougher to encode will cause an appropriate increase in bit rate.
Some people here are speaking as if, however, VBR will drop bit rates during less demanding passages.
Well, which is it? I wish I was in front of my Mac right now instead of this PC I'm stuck with at the moment... I'd like to see if the iTunes Preferences dialog sheds any light on the subject.
I noticed that AAC doesn't have a VBR option -- or at least, if it can have one, the option isn't being offered in iTunes -- so if I decide to re-encode my library with AAC, VBR will be a moot point.
Originally posted by shetline
I'm seeing conflicting views of what VBR does...
Some people here are speaking as if, however, VBR will drop bit rates during less demanding passages.
Don't trust what I said. I'm talking out of my... yeah.
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
Filter <10Hz - Human hearing only goes down to ~20Hz but you can still feel lower frequencies with decent equipment. I'd tick it unless you feel strongly about it.
In theory, human are suppose to hear from 20-20kHz. However, anything lower than say, 80 hz, is more "felt" than "heard". Case in point, you cannot localize such bass which is why you are free to, more or less, place the subwoofer in one's 5.1 home theater anywhere (purist would argue putting it in a corner or have matched pair, etc).
I would tick it as well but really, I would bet money you cannot tell one bit of a difference.
Furthermore, I agree with BR that it is doubtful that you can hear ANY difference b/w 256kbps vs that of the CD original.
Thanks
Jools
Yes, iPod will play AIFF, though the resulting files are much larger. They average around 30-40 MB each for the average 3-4 minute pop song.
Also, if you rip the track from the original medium (CD, DAT, etc), you should notice a difference between the resulting MP3 and AIFF files, since AIFF files are not compressed.
I'm no audiophile I guess, 160Kbs MP3's sound perfect to me, as do 128Kbps AAC files.
LameBrain from osx.freshmeat.net ( http://osx.freshmeat.net/projects/la...c_id=118%2C119 )
and using:
192Kbits, joint stereo, quality setting 2 (0 being highest quality, excruciatingly long encode time, not substamtially better than 2, and 9 being superfast to encode, but crap quality).
give that a try, kld, lemme know what you think. Lame is pretty much as good as it gets for mp3 quality, quite possibly better than fraunhoffer's.
If that leaves you dissatisfied, try 256kb/sec. there's a law of diminishing returns with higher bitrates, much like the law of diminishing returns with lame's settings of 2 and 0.
Example:
Natalie Imbruglia - Torn - 4:04 is 7.2 Megs encoded at 8x
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
LameBrain
If you're going to the trouble of using the LAME encoder then you should use the built in setting for transparent (i.e. indistinguishable from the CD under lab conditions by 99% of the people, for 99% of audio, 99% of the time) audio encoding, namely --alt-preset standard, or if you're an audiophile and can't stand the thought of listening to the same quality of audio as others with normal hearing, because you know you're in that 1% then you can go for --alt-preset extreme, or even --alt-preset insane (though neither will give any real gain).
These settings have been extensively tested by people who not only have better hearing than most, they've got better equipment and extensive experience in spotting encoding artifacts.
If you're interested refer to www.hydrogenaudio.org where they have and up-to-date list of recommended command-line settings, release builds and compiles for several platforms.
i amnt an audiophile, i want to save space, and i cannot tell the difference!
If you makes a mp3 into AAC, will the sound quality drop?
MAX