iTunes encoding quality

[GadgetLover]

OK, so I'm considering re-encoding my CD's into 192k mp3's. I presently have them encoded for my personal listening pleasure (love my Nomad JukeBox baby!) at 128k. Is this necessary? A good idea? A must? While I still will keep them encoded at 128k for my mp3 player (so I can listen to more tunes), I was considering re-encoding at a higher quality bit-rate for "near CD quality" listening via my home stereo system. What do you all suggest? I have a lot of mp3s so re-encoding will: (a) take a loooong(!) time and (b) take double the space (gigs!) but se la vie if necessary.

Also, when (if ever) do people encode at HIGHER than 192k? If a CD is 650MB and you can get it down to 65MB (128k) it makes great sense if the sound quality is good enough. If you can get it down to 130MB it still makes sense (192k). But at some point (260MB, 325MB??) it is lame (no pun intended) -- less quality but not much less size. At some point in the argument, one might as well just 'rip' the CD into AIFF and leave it at that.

So, you audiophiles out there, please comment ....

[ScottW]

I just finished encoding around 200+ songs tonight at 192. It is NOT double the size by any means, only slightly larger. I think 192 sounds great, but Im not a music junkie either.

Admin

[GadgetLover]

I have not tried encoding at 192k but my friend did and said it was about 2.1 times bigger than the 128k file. Is that not true? Can someone tell me how big 10-20 songs are at 128k AND 192k (for comparison)?

Also, what is the difference between "joint stereo" and "stereo"?

Finally, do you 'customize' your encoding and--assuming that you all encode at 192k--turn ON "variable bit-rate encoding"? Is this necessary?

I am trying to create the best overall settings to encode ALL of my CD collection into mp3s -- so it will take up ALOT of space on my hard drive but it will be worth it (to some degree of space sacrifice) to get the quality out of it. I like the idea of using my Mac as a jukebox rather than manually switching between CDs every time I want to listen to different artists/songs.

[halli]

I listen to music with iTunes through my stereo system so I need good quality, 128 bit was too low but I can hear no difference between 160 bit and 192 bit (but a huge difference between 128 bit and 160 bit) so I encoded my whole music library in 160 bit and my 124 hours of music takes only 8,1 GB of space (about 1,1 MB per minute)

[GadgetLover]

Thanks for your input Halli!

Halli's comment regarding listening to encoded music through a HIGH-FIDELATY STEREO SYSTEM (not SoundSticks!) brings up a good point here:

If anyone replies in this forum regarding listening to mp3s on such a stereo, please include what type of stereo system you have (generally) ... for example, Halli reported that s/he heard no noticeable difference between 160k and 192k encoded mp3s but a big difference between 128k and 160k. And this may be quite true for Halli but not true for someone with a higher end hi-fi system (I used to think "hi-end" meant more than $500 for a receiver ... until I listened to such components costing more than $5,000 dollars (and up). Same with speakers... I used to think $250 (pair) 3-way speakers sounded great, then I thought that $250 (each) speakers sounded greast, then I listened to $500 (each) tower speakers (etc) ... until a friend took me to a store in Los Angeles (read: store for celebrities and rich folks only) where--believe it or not--they sell speakers costing as much as $80,000 (EACH!!). (A waste of money if you asked me, but then again, I'm not Bill Gates.) So, as they say, "it is all relative." Alas, this brings me to my point: the more info the readers have about what someone's listening components are the better their informed decision will be on whether or not they will likely notice any difference in quality.

... and if you ARE Bill Gates (or Steve Jobs, Shaq, or George Lucas) then please don't reply 'cuz we all know that our systems suck compared to yours and we don't care! Cuz we have no intention on selling our clothes, cars or homes just to buy a fancy tin can that has sound coming out of it -- I'd rather listen to the radio.

[dricci]

Most of my MP3s are 128 and sound fine (to me anyways) going thru my analog MidiLand subwolfer and speakers that come out of my iMac's audio out port. Haven't tried hooking it up to my stereo directly yet, but I have burnt some audio CDs from 128 MP3s and they sound fine on my surround sound stereo, too. I guess it's just how sensitive your ears can pick up

[julguribye]

Wow! You like to write!

I encode them after how much I think I'm gonig to listen to them.
192 for most. 160 for less. I can't hear much difference, though.

[GadgetLover]

Originally posted by julguribye
Wow! You like to write!

I am trying to keep this forum focused and organized, as I think that this is information that many people are interested in. When this forum is 'closed' I will try to get it moved to the FAQ forum.