Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

How do you encode your mp3's for best size and quality?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse









X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How do you encode your mp3's for best size and quality?

    I've always used Razorlame set at 192kbps. I've recently been reading some things about using VBR for better quality. I have a ton of mp3's on my iPhone, so I'm always looking for best quality at the smallest size. Curious to find out what others do.
    My Gear:
    Peavey Wolfgang
    Squier Tele Custom II
    Marshall DSL50
    Custom 2x12 w/ Vet30 and ET65
    Fender Mustang II

    SPAM:
    Peavey 4x12MS - unloaded - $90
    Schecter C1 Plus Transparent Blue with JB/59 pickups - $300

    WANTED:
    Seymour Duncan Custom/59 or Custom/Jazz set (zebra)
    Dimarzio AZ/AN set (zebra)

    My Band







    Originally Posted by OverDriven


    Dude you have excellent taste. Teh butt is so much more important than teh bewbz.

  • #2
    LAME at 320k, always using slowest (highest quality) conversion

    Comment


    • #3
      flac
      | Destination : Destruction | Kalmanväki | Luujauho | Clips | Youtube | Gear |

      Comment


      • #4
        320 or VBR.



        ONLY.
        My project: http://www.myspace.com/humanconspiracymusic

        Bogner Ecstasy 101b :: Blackstar HT5-H :: Trinity Triwatt DR103 clone (Click to view build thread)
        Bogner 4x12 :: Genz Benz 2x12 :: Homebuilt 2x12 loaded with (2) Weber FC12's for the Triwatt

        Great Transactions: Skaaks, Skunx, CARRguitar, Zacman0126, theweight, heatfromcold, Ricky Bobby

        Comment


        • #5






          Quote Originally Posted by KCTigerChief
          View Post

          320 or VBR.



          ONLY.




          +1
          GREAT TRANSACTIONS WITH.....---->CLICK HERE

          Comment


          • #6
            V0 VBR at that.
            Good deals with JoeGuitar717, Riff2AX, chriscnb, LukeBurke1

            Comment


            • #7
              I have a hard drive full of mp3's at 320 kbps. Will I gain or lose anything (size and quality) if I encode them to a different format or bitrate? I like to get the files a bit smaller to add to my iPhone.
              My Gear:
              Peavey Wolfgang
              Squier Tele Custom II
              Marshall DSL50
              Custom 2x12 w/ Vet30 and ET65
              Fender Mustang II

              SPAM:
              Peavey 4x12MS - unloaded - $90
              Schecter C1 Plus Transparent Blue with JB/59 pickups - $300

              WANTED:
              Seymour Duncan Custom/59 or Custom/Jazz set (zebra)
              Dimarzio AZ/AN set (zebra)

              My Band







              Originally Posted by OverDriven


              Dude you have excellent taste. Teh butt is so much more important than teh bewbz.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'd honestly rather they took up more space and sounded better.

                MP3 sounds gash as it is without encoding them to be even smaller.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I read somewhere that 224 VBR is 99% transparent compared to CBR 320. What do you guys think?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There is a certain point where the bitrate is nearly indistinguishable to the human ear, but I'm not certain what it is. VBR is really only useful for trying to save space. It lowers the bitrate at points of the song that have dead air or not a lot going in in the frequency spectrum, and keeps the higher bitrate through the main parts of the song.



                    Someone fact check me here . . .
                    Jet City EarhartJet City JCA100H -> Avatar 2x12 -> Celestion LynchbacksPRS SE 245Sterling AX40FOR SALEBuy/sell/trade referencesMy primary band page (Seventh Day)My secondary band page (Adam Evolving)Proud member of the Jet Setters (Jet City Lounge)

                    Comment


                    • #11






                      Quote Originally Posted by TheRymanChu
                      View Post

                      I read somewhere that 224 VBR is 99% transparent compared to CBR 320. What do you guys think?




                      meh. what's 99% transparent mean? that sounds like bad unsubstantiatable marketing blab to me.



                      with rock music, you can get away with lower bitrates.. but why bother? i rip everything to 320kbps as slow as i can, and don't mess with VBR. i've heard vbr is better, for some odd reason, but if you don't need to truncate stuff, why would you? just use more space.. ****************.. disk space is practically free, and i have a ****************ton of music on my ipod, and it's STILL not full.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        320 constant, good enough for anything occasional use. Dirty confession, I don't have the ears anymore to distinguish it from a cd,

                        so .mp3s for me...



                        192-220 I hear a difference with 320, so why encode lower?
                        "is this tone obtainable using the HD500 or Axe Fx? Overall, for convenience and volume control, should I buy the Axe Fx over actual tube amps? I don't plan on playing loud; just playing at home and recording on my Mac. Thanks man, you are awesome!


                        short answer: no...

                        long answer: no way..."

                        Comment


                        • #13






                          Quote Originally Posted by tech21man
                          View Post

                          320 constant, good enough for anything occasional use. Dirty confession, I don't have the ears anymore to distinguish it from a cd,

                          so .mp3s for me...



                          192-220 I hear a difference with 320, so why encode lower?




                          I'm fine with 192, though I don't have an expensive stereo. If I did and could tell a difference I'd try to go with 320, but for my needs 192 saves space and works perfectly fine. It might be worth comparing a track or two of each 192 and 320 and see if you can notice a worthwhile difference before investing in the time and storage space to change it all.
                          __________________________________________________ ________
                          Great transactions: -Juggernaut-, Beergoblin, Boris the Blade, Guttermouth, Tubesteakfortone, thriftyshirt, craftswitch, negative theory, and dethmetalanimal

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I understand what you are saying. I guess I should point out that there isn't a world of difference as it is for example when going up from 128 but if I had to describe it, I'd say that the 192 ones sound more compressed and smaller than the 320 constant through a good set of headphones for example and a bit less clear on the cymballs for example on a drum track. Not much but it is there on the A/B. The 128 ones...swoosh all over the place on that area!
                            "is this tone obtainable using the HD500 or Axe Fx? Overall, for convenience and volume control, should I buy the Axe Fx over actual tube amps? I don't plan on playing loud; just playing at home and recording on my Mac. Thanks man, you are awesome!


                            short answer: no...

                            long answer: no way..."

                            Comment



                            Working...
                            X