[sjwong]

128 kbps is pushing it a little bit...I find there's a difference between 128 and 192, but after this it improves minimally on a portable setup. There really isn't a need to go lossless, but you may want to consider going a bit higher if you don't have TOO much. Then again, if you're happy with 128 and it was ripped well, then I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[LFC_SL]

The old trade off between storage space and quality...

It's all subjective. Rip say one album at the higher quality you're thinking of, then do an a/b test, and hear for yourself whether you'd care enough about the difference in quality to re-rip everything. Me personally, after doing this now use MP3 320kbps only

And I found the 3 days re-ripping quite relaxing and therapeutic

lol

 

[Asr]

128 kb/s really IS a steaming pile of crap though.

160 kb/s should be your absolute minimum. There's a huge jump between 128 and 160.

I recommend going to 192 kb/s though, or if your storage can stretch, VBR ranging from 112 to 320.

 

[Cousin Patty]

If you're buying a 60gig ipod then I would put rockbox on it and put as much FLAC on there as you can. Im sure there are some cd's that you dont really care about having with you on the go, so you could leave those out or re-rip the must have cd's to FLAC and then whatever else just leave as 128kbps

 

[Beach123456]

Go as low as you can without noticing a difference. I wouldnt go for lossless though, because it really eats up your battery.

 

[sidewinder]

Rip to .wav if you can. There's a LOT of difference between 320kB/sec MP3 and a WAV in terms of air/dynamics. The better the ear/headphone, the better you'll here the difference. A computer reveals this more than's good for you

But a fine MP3/CD player will too.

 

[iSleipnir]

I would re-rip. Honestly, I've re-ripped my music so many times I finaly said forget it, bit the bullet and he hdd space and ripped everything to lossless. It took me about a month. From that I transcoded to 256vbr. But anyway...

Even on portable systems I can hear the difference between 128 and better and I think it's worth the loss in hdd space for the slightly better sound.

 

[Just Josh]

If you are getting a 60 GB iPod than definatley rip no less than 192 vbr aac IMO. Thats just too much space to fill if you were to rip at 128. It would take you YEARS. On a personal note, I use 128 aac vbr for my 30GB ipod. When I'm out I can't tell the difference. When I am home I just listen to CD's or higher quality mp3's/aac's.

 

[photek]

heres my suggestion, keep in mind I'm not the audiophille type of person who absolutely needs lossless and 320kbps mp3s all the time.

are your 128kbps files in stereo? If it is, in my experience 128 in stereo sounds pretty bad. HOWEVER, a 128kbps file in joint-stereo sounds much different, much better than stereo. If its in stereo, I'd do a test, rerip from cd in 128 joint stereo, if you can tell a difference between the two 128 files, then you should rerip. (but dont bother ripping to 128 joint stereo, go higher)

however, I'd just rerip your favorite songs first, and gradually rerip other cds when you want (to save you the stress) If your ripping to mp3, I'd suggest using EAC and LAME 3.97b2 only. Also use vbr presets, and joint stereo. Check the faqs at hydrogenaudio.org for more info. Use preset alt-standard with LAME 3.97b2, you dont have to use EAC, if you have another program that uses lame use alt-standard preset or better.

 

[SAP7]

All mine is lossless, and I was wondering why my battery lasts maybe 4 lots of 2hr sessions....
I was thinking it may be dud.

Damn! Is there an audiophile balance to strike where I can combine excvellent sound WITH battery life.

If its lossless thats chewing up my battery, I will have to rethink as i can't take a 5 day charge period!

 

[Chri5peed]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAP7 Damn! Is there an audiophile balance to strike where I can combine excvellent sound WITH battery life.

Heh, not using Lossless. You know how it works? The player decompresses the files as its playing them. Much like a rar archive; its stored small but it opens up when needed.
This causes the CPU to work more and use more battery life. Also why some Lossless codecs are not suited for portable DAPs.

Fairly high VBR mp3s seem the way to go? All your Lossless stuff can be converted to anything lossy...keep the source file.


edit - I support Stevie Gs boys.

 

[D555]

Experiment, experiment, experiment.....

There are so many variables to juggle.

While I have a lot of MP3 and keep most of it in the low-mid 200's with joint stereo, LAME the *highest* quality (for me) of the lossy codecs is ATRAC 3+ at 256 or 352kpbs.

Paul

 

[dannay337]

Quote:

Originally Posted by photek are your 128kbps files in stereo? If it is, in my experience 128 in stereo sounds pretty bad. HOWEVER, a 128kbps file in joint-stereo sounds much different, much better than stereo. If its in stereo, I'd do a test, rerip from cd in 128 joint stereo, if you can tell a difference between the two 128 files, then you should rerip. (but dont bother ripping to 128 joint stereo, go higher)

Would you mind explaining the difference between stereo and joint-stereo?

I don't think my 128kbps sound BAD, but I can definitely tell the difference between them and 192kbps. I did a search... the encoder doesn't make a huge difference, correct? If it does, I'm probably not that likely to notice.

 

[Chri5peed]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannay337 the encoder doesn't make a huge difference, correct? If it does, I'm probably not that likely to notice.

Lol, the encoder is probably the most important aspect.

 

[Skylab]

Joint stereo is an ABSOLUTE no-no. This will eminate much of the stereo separation in your music.

128k MP3 really does sound bad. Just moving up to VBR MP3 with 192k as the min rate will be SOOOO much better. But VBR MP3 with 224 min rate will be audibly better.

If you are going to re-rip, though, then do rip in WAV or a lossless format. Then, as suggested above, transcode to whatever you want for porable use, but you will then have the files in true CD quality and can make copies in whatever quality you want for various purposes. I use Lossless on my 60GB iPod, but 192k min VBR for my Nano since it has so much less space and I use it only for running.