[SlaughterX]

Is there actually a difference in sound quality at this high of a bitrate? I think my receiver peaks out at 192k, and my Zune seems to be the same. I previously had all my CDs ripped at 128k (which was supposed to be CD quality), but I just started reripping everything at 320k. Am I just wasting space, should I have just ripped them at 192k?

 

[tattoou2]

Your question has been answered here at least 1,001 times. Do a search in the Portable audio section and voila!, you just might find more threads than you care to read.

 

[SiriuslyCold]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlaughterX /img/forum/go_quote.gif ... I think my receiver peaks out at 192k, and my Zune seems to be the same.

what do you mean by this?

 

[odigg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlaughterX /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is there actually a difference in sound quality at this high of a bitrate? I think my receiver peaks out at 192k, and my Zune seems to be the same. I previously had all my CDs ripped at 128k (which was supposed to be CD quality), but I just started reripping everything at 320k. Am I just wasting space, should I have just ripped them at 192k?

You've completely mixed up two things.

192k on your receiver is sampling rate in kilohertz. 320k with mp3 is kilobits per second (bit rate).

Receivers typically have 24 bit / 192 khz dacs.

Mp3 - MP3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - Look for the bit rate heading in that article.

Audio sample rate - Sampling (signal processing) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dzjudz]

And as for there being a difference in sound quality: get 192kbps and 320kbps versions of the same song and listen for yourself. If you can't hear a difference: great! That means you can put more songs on your Zune

.

 

[MCC]

Seeing the words "128k" and "CD-quality" in the same sentence almost makes me want to stab someone. Thankfully I'm not violent like that.

But seriously, try comparing 192k and 320k in your own setup. That's the only way to tell if one's better than the other to you. I myself rip to FLAC so that I have a lossless master to compress from when I need to squeeze more music onto my Zune.

 

[crossmd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlaughterX /img/forum/go_quote.gif ..should I have just ripped them at 192k?

You should have ripped them in FLAC and compressed down.

 

[Suntory_Times]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzjudz /img/forum/go_quote.gif And as for there being a difference in sound quality: get 192kbps and 320kbps versions of the same song and listen for yourself. If you can't hear a difference: great! That means you can put more songs on your Zune .

Just make sure you try it with several different songs/styles of music. As some music is more revealing then others.

 

[krmathis]

Oh no! Not again...

There are difference in the audio data (loss of data) and hence there are always the possibility that the difference is audible.

You simply have to perform a test on your own, if the difference is audible. And if so, if the increased file size is worth it.