PL_ Veteran Posted May 19, 2009 Veteran Share Posted May 19, 2009 I'm not really interested in ripping to FLAC because of the lack of compatibility and disk space, and I've been told that when ripped properly, the human ear can't distinguish between lossy and lossless (correct me if I'm wrong). So then I heard the best setting is to rip to 320kbps VBR MP3, but I figured since AAC is smaller and supposedly higher quality that would be better, but it turns out iTunes can only do 256kbps VBR AAC at the maximum. Then I've read that iTunes VBR isn't true VBR - instead it takes your value and uses that as the lowest possible bitrate, instead of averaging it. Now I'm just confused - ideally I'd like to use iTunes to rip my CDs with, but now I'm not sure :/ What do you guys use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Gil Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 iTunes 128k AAC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Charming Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Rip at the highest quality, you can transcode later from a lossless format without problems. Disk space isn't expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1406 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 All of the information you're ever likely to need will be here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showforum=62 One little amendment to the original post - if you rip at 320k in mp3 it will be CBR (constant bitrate), not VBR. If you don't want to use lossless codecs then I'd say go for V0 VBR or 320 CBR (despite what the below link says). And you're right, I doubt you're likely to hear any difference between things when the bitrate is that high anyway. It's pretty much a psychological effect. Edit: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Gil Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Rip at the highest quality, you can transcode later from a lossless format without problems. Disk space isn't expensive. Why do that when we own the CD's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashing Pumpkin Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 WMP MP3 - 192kbps Personally, I can't tell the difference between these files, and any other music files I listen to. If I'm going to download an album that's available in VBR and 192k flavours, I will always go for the 192k just because of the smaller file size (not just for PC but for MP3 player too - I realise I could convert tracks then put them on my media player to save space, but why waste all that time) and the shorter download time. No doubt a bunch of audiophiles will come shout at me now :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1406 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Shouldn't a V2 VBR have a smaller filesize than a CBR? As VBRs drop bits when they aren't needed (although they add them when they are). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashing Pumpkin Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 All I know is that when I search for music, VBR albums are usually higher total file size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmatic Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 imho, i would save it as a .wav file, then somehow do the process of tranferring onto my portable audio player (im assuming thats the reason you said compatibility with FLAC) together with encoding... i dont use iTunes and dont have an iPod, but what i would do is open the .wav files in an mp3 encoding program and tell it to save onto the player... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Windows media player to rip in MP3 at 256 kbps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDude Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I use MP3 192 kbps. Anything lower, I hear the compression. 192 kbps is perfect. It sounds identical to the CD. Anything higher is just a waste of disk space, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
protocol7 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I think V0 mp3 is probably the best choice for filesize vs quality. You can use any ripper than supports LAME. If you want to be sure of a good rip (no glitches etc) use EAC. You can find some detailled guides here. I use it with FLAC because I can hear the difference between 320 mp3 and FLAC as clear as day. Probably depends on your speaker setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1406 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I think what we are all forgetting is that we are listening on different hardware, which will of course make a difference. If you have highest quality sound hardware then you are more likely to hear differences in the bass etc - it goes with the territory of the hardware I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee G. Veteran Posted May 19, 2009 Veteran Share Posted May 19, 2009 V0 is the most efficient bitrate to rip at, for file size vs. quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cork1958 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 WMP MP3 - 192kbpsPersonally, I can't tell the difference between these files, and any other music files I listen to. If I'm going to download an album that's available in VBR and 192k flavours, I will always go for the 192k just because of the smaller file size (not just for PC but for MP3 player too - I realise I could convert tracks then put them on my media player to save space, but why waste all that time) and the shorter download time. No doubt a bunch of audiophiles will come shout at me now :rofl: The perfect answer!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashing Pumpkin Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 The perfect answer!! Haha, cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sim1 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 For MP3, use LAME encoder. Whatever settings over 192kbps should be quite good. I personally use the Fast Extreme preset, but it's a matter of personal taste. If you don't want any compression at all you can try FLAC or others lossless audio codecs (for archiving purposes for example). Keep in mind, when there's no "compression", the files are quite big! Hope this helps, -sim1 :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Fahim S. MVC Posted May 21, 2009 MVC Share Posted May 21, 2009 It really depends how you manage and listen to your music. Am I right to assume that you own an iPod and are wanting the convenience of using iTunes? If so I wouldn't rip to ALAC, because iTunes won't transcode to a smaller file format before putting your music on your device (why, I really have no idea). That leaves you with MP3 or AAC. I would personally choose AAC at 256, which if you are wanting lossy compression and iTunes is your most convenient choice, best sound quality with the best file size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROM3000 Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I personally rip using EAC and transcode to V2 VBR mp3. I also keep an ape image of my CDs so that if the original CD is damaged, I can make a bit for bit copy of it. Hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejn Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 I always go MP3 320kbps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts