• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Byte Me!

Solina Dave

Solina Dave

Member
Hello, I'm back!

I've got a new computer, and I'm ripping CDs. Audio quality settings are anywhere from 48 Kbps to 192 Kbps., with a default setting of 128 Kbps. It says that 192 Kbps is the best quality of course, and my CD player will interpret that data..
Does anyone believe that they can perceive a significant difference between 48 and 192, especially between 128, 160, and 192 Kbps. If 192 supposedly is the best, and if file size isn't a factor, why wouldn't you go that way? Just curious. Any, and all comments, suggestions, and experiences would be welcome.

Thanks.................................Dave
 
Register to hide this ad
I'm assUming you're talking MP3. If so, and file size isn't a factor, I'd HIGHLY suggest going with something like FLAC instead. That's totally lossless, whereas with MP3, you lose music.

If you insist on sticking with MP3 for portability, I'd suggest something like 256VBR (variable bit rate). That ups the resolution on more complex bits for better playback quality.

And if it's about portability, and file size isn't an issue, why not rip both formats? I use FLAC exclusively on the home system, and burn the "5 star" stuff to MP3 as well, then shuffle a bunch of those to a thumb drive for the road. Works nicely, for me anyway.
 
Solina Dave said:
Hello, I'm back!

I've got a new computer, and I'm ripping CDs. Audio quality settings are anywhere from 48 Kbps to 192 Kbps., with a default setting of 128 Kbps. It says that 192 Kbps is the best quality of course, and my CD player will interpret that data..
Does anyone believe that they can perceive a significant difference between 48 and 192, especially between 128, 160, and 192 Kbps. If 192 supposedly is the best, and if file size isn't a factor, why wouldn't you go that way? Just curious. Any, and all comments, suggestions, and experiences would be welcome.

Thanks.................................Dave
Click to expand...
I can't tell whether you're talking about hi-res or mp3. It sounds like you're confusing concepts a bit. 192Kbps isn't the best quality you can get in mp3 format. I think 384Kbps is. I can definitely detect quality issues in mp3 files below 192Kbps.
 
Last edited:
sKiZo's answer is right on the money.

The best idea is to use FLAC if space is not an issue. Anything less than a lossless format is a disservice to your CDs unless you're working with a space-limited portable player (even then, it depends on what you want out of it).

I do the same thing as sKiZo, in that I rip FLAC for my Hi-Fi computer playback and lossy files (iTunes VBR m4a at 128kbps) for my iPod. I maintain a large library on my iPod for variety, otherwise I would use 256kbps.

And as far as differences, yeah I definitely can perceive the difference between the bitrates you list. Bitrates below 128kbps are just unlistenable to me. The difference is quite noticeable until 320 kbps even. After that, it's not as noticeable right off to my ears, however lossless definitely sounds the best.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your interest. I can tell that you guys are way over my head.
Everything I have, on my computer, relates to Windows Media Player. Rip format options are WMA (default), WMA Pro, WMA (variable bit rate), WMA (lossless), Mp3, and WAV (lossless).
Audio Quality settings are as I stated before, 48 to 192 Kbps.
I'd just as soon use the process, and the options available to me with the system that I have. Portability is not a necessity, and all my needs are for home use, and in my car. I do make thumb-drives for the car.
I don't even know what FLAC is. Maybe someday. I simply need to know what you think, based on the settings I have, would result in the best sound I could expect, and again as simply as possible, why a particular setting would be best. I just want to keep it simple, but I do know what sounds good, and what sounds like crap.

Thanks again..............................Dave
 
Solina Dave said:
Thanks for your interest. I can tell that you guys are way over my head.
Everything I have, on my computer, relates to Windows Media Player. Rip format options are WMA (default), WMA Pro, WMA (variable bit rate), WMA (lossless), Mp3, and WAV (lossless).
Audio Quality settings are as I stated before, 48 to 192 Kbps.
I'd just as soon use the process, and the options available to me with the system that I have. Portability is not a necessity, and all my needs are for home use, and in my car. I do make thumb-drives for the car.
I don't even know what FLAC is. Maybe someday. I simply need to know what you think, based on the settings I have, would result in the best sound I could expect, and again as simply as possible, why a particular setting would be best. I just want to keep it simple, but I do know what sounds good, and what sounds like crap.

Thanks again..............................Dave
Click to expand...
There are plenty of other programs out there that'll rip FLAC, many free and easy to use. We can definitely help walk you through them if you should so choose.

However, with Windows Media Player, use WMA Pro, WMA lossless, or WAV. WMA Pro/Lossless are limited in the amount of programs it can be played back on, however WAV is troublesome with maintaining its metadata (artist name, song name, etc.).

FLAC is the most versatile and thus the most preferred lossless format. It also takes up less space.
 
for ripping CDs lossless FLAC , SHN , APE and so on , I can hear a big difference in compressed bit rates
 
With the options you listed, I'd go with WMA. Files are quite large, but ... you did mention that not being a problem?

In any case, that seems to be the only "lossless" format in your list of options.

PS ... does Windows media player still play the DRM (Digital Rights Mgt) game? That was a real PITA that I'd just as soon avoid.
 
You want to select a lossless format. Experiment - try WMA and FLAC, see which works better for you.

If you select MP3 then pick the "Best Quality". 192KB is poor quality.
 
I rip to 2 libraries. MP3 (320 kbps) and lossless.
I copy MP3 to phone to play in car or headphones outdoors, works fine for that. 320 kbps is the least compressed MP3 format. The resulting file is still much smaller than lossless but sound quality is good.

Lossless is for my home system, want the best quality for that. Windows Media player works fine for ripping and playing. You can always try different ripping software. The important thing is to rip lossless to get the best quality possible.
 
192 is terrible. I'd put it at 50/50 if I have the choice between 192 and no music at all.
320k is the best MP3 audio quality rate you can get and where I prefer to rip.
 
I rip all my CD's to FLAC to an NAS. They also get converted to MP3@320VBR for my portable player. EAC (Exact Audio Copy) and FREAC (Free Audio Converter) are what I use. One is for ripping the other is for file conversions.
 
JoeESP9 said:
I rip all my CD's to FLAC to an NAS. They also get converted to MP3@320VBR for my portable player. EAC (Exact Audio Copy) and FREAC (Free Audio Converter) are what I use. One is for ripping the other is for file conversions.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the process I use, but mine go to my fileserver. I strongly suggest that people RIP to a lossless format. I unfortunately had to reRIP some 1900 CDs after initially doing it in MP3. That's not a lot of fun and took damn near an entire summer.

Hear's a link to EAC:

http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=EAC_and_FLAC
 
bhunter said:
That is exactly the process I use, but mine go to my fileserver. I strongly suggest that people RIP to a lossless format. I unfortunately had to reRIP some 1900 CDs after initially doing it in MP3. That's not a lot of fun and took damn near an entire summer.

Hear's a link to EAC:

http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/

http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=EAC_and_FLAC
Click to expand...
I recently re-ripped all my CDs to lossless as well. I had around 1200 at the time. It took me about 3 weeks to get them all done and I had all that time off.
 
The guys have told you all you need to know. Let's recap -

1) More data, better sound.
2) WMA (which I started out with as well) is a limited format. I'd avoid at all costs.
3) FLAC to me is the supreme format when going smaller. Keeping the sound and halving the space. It's all I use, anymore.
4) EAC is a great program to rip cds with.
5) Foobar has its following here. I didn't ever feel comfortable with it, same as with JRiver (which don't get me wrong, SOUNDS amazing, but I'm just finding it more than I need) and you can even use old, unsupported Winamp (which I use mostly, don't know why I'm such a luddite this way).

Have fun, and remember, 192kps sucks, lol.
 
I have two libraries.

One WAV (all my CDs ripped to WAV), one MP3 192VBR. 192VBR works good for me as compromise between sound and size for portable devices.
 
Solina Dave said:
my CD player will interpret that data.
Click to expand...
Solina Dave said:
I do make thumb-drives for the car.
Click to expand...
Safe to assume that you mean that by "CD player" you mean your car player does play MP3 format?

If so then you can improve your thumb drive SQ by uping the bitrate to 320. Windows Media Player maxes out at 192 due to a licensing limitation. To go higher you will need to use another app (paid or free) that can go beyond WMP's 192 "max quality" setting.

Now, unless your car's player knows what FLAC is you may want to consider having two libraries. Lossless FLAC for home...320 MP3 for car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom