Hi Guys,

I'm going to start ripping my entire CD collection to AAC format so I don't have to carry my huge CD case around anymore and was wondering how much of a difference the bit rate makes.

Is there a noticable difference between 128K and 256K?

 

yes. the difference between 128k, and 190k for example is a lot more noticable than say 190k to 256k. Either way I would be more inclined to rip them at the higher bitrate unless space is a huge factor.

Remember, you can always re-encode a 256k track down to 128k, but you can't go from 128k to 256k if you changed your mind afterwards.

regards, Mark

 

Yeah, stay in the 190k range, all my music is ripped now for the same reason(space), and I can barely tell the difference between the original and the ripped. Some types of music can be ripped at lower bit rates depending on their type as they may have poor frequency extension and sonics in general, (old folk or 50's or 60's music) with little effect on the overall sound quality. Experiment and decide for yourself.

 

I'm going to go w/ 256K I think. Would there be much of a difference between that and 320K?

 

I doubt you'd be able to tell. I can't tell a differnce between 256, and 320... 128 and 190 if a whole different story.

Mark

 

That is unless the tracks have been "Digitally Remastered" [img]graemlins/jack.gif[/img]

[img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img] Mark

 

Thanks guys [img]smile.gif[/img]

 

Why AAC and not MP3?

 

B/c the files are for sole use w/ an Ipod. I decided to rip everything in Apple LossLess format though.

But I do believe AAC to be a better choice than MP3 b/c it provides better sound at the same compression as MP3 and it is likely to replace MP3 as the standard lossy format.

[ July 28, 2005, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Kool ]

 

I do agree with what you just said, just as a side note, it wasn't apple who developed the format, they have jsut brought attention to it since the Ipod was introduced.
and you do lose quality with the compression. just as with an MP3, any time the music track is compressed you are losing some amount of quality, big or small. AAC does have better handling than MP3 when compression between the 2 are compared. I just wanted to comment on the "LossLess" term you used.
just an FYI, Mark [img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

[ July 28, 2005, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: SQ Civic ]