Originally Posted by
Bill Lewis
And yes the quality of an mp3 can vary depending on the sampling rate of the rip. Better sampling rates will produce pretty good mp3's but the files get bigger too.
Just to add a data point to that: before ripping my entire CD collection (600+ discs) to MP3, I ran a few tests - rip to MP3, burn back to audio CD, A-B compare with original. At 320bps I can't tell the difference played through my (IMHO) pretty decent speakers. At 160bps there's a difference but the MP3 is still pretty good, and I doubt you'd notice played through typical iPod earplugs. The 320bps setting works out to roughly a 4:1 compression or close to 80GB in my case, but at 160bps the whole thing would still fit on one of the bigger iPods.
Side question: this whole exercise was to free up space in my Sony CD carousels (by consolidating discs, deleting duplicates, etc), so I went with the higher sample rate. If I should get an iPod-like widget in the future, is there software available that will batch-resample the MP3 files I've got now? (One-at-a-time is a really bad idea: we're talking 6300+ files...probably faster to re-rip the whole set.)
Yoga class makes me feel like a total stud, mostly because I'm about as flexible as a 2x4.
"Design"? Possibly. "Intelligent"? Sure doesn't look like it from this angle.
We used to be hunter gatherers. Now we're shopper borrowers.
The three most important words in the English language: "Front Towards Enemy".
The world makes a lot more sense when you remember that Butthead was the smart one.
You can never be too rich, too thin, or have too much ammo.
Member
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote