Bam Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Is this possible? I've currently got 550 songs on my computer, but its taking up 7.64 GB of space. Now I have a 6GB MP3 player and friends will more songs on the same amount of space, for some reason my shit is just not compressing or something. Like I have a bunch of songs that are 3-4 MB, but then I have a shitton of songs taking up hundreds of MB. Why?? When they are the same length. Thanks guys Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rally Pat Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 not all songs are encoded at the same bitrate with the same codec. like i have mp3's that are 3 megs, and i have mp3's that are 10 or 15 megs. i also have the huge .ape and .flac file formats for my initial d ost's. you just have to encode them all at a lower bitrate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bam Posted April 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 what's a bitrate and what does changing it do to a song? Also, whats the difference between the types of songs. Such as WAV, MP3, etc etc? Thanks Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rally Pat Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 bitrate is the quality of a song, the higher the bit rate, the better the quality. and wav, mp3, and ect are all different formats aka they use different encoding methods to come out with different types of audio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berto Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 ij ust got my 5gb mp3 player friday and i love it right now i'm in the process of ripping all my CD's into mp3's using windows media player 10 i set the bitrate to 128 kbit from what i understand thats CD quality. i've fit like 40 CD's on there and not even half way full and it sounds fine. also remember higher bitrate uses up your battery faster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rally Pat Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 128 is bare minimum cd quality. i like to keep most of my songs around the 300's, but of couse i have lower ones that i have downloaded off the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berto Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 help me out here if i'm wrong. is 128 kbits is the rate on a CD and you rip it at 300 ur still only getting the same quality as the original with some "dead space". what i'm trying to say is technically u can't make the quality better than the source. correct me if i'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rally Pat Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 your correct, however no matter which way you rip a cd, you are going to have some level of quality loss. by setting the bitrate higher than the cd's you can limit that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
large_x7 Posted April 24, 2005 Report Share Posted April 24, 2005 128 is not CD quality. Its usually listed as "near CD quality" I'm gonna be getting an mp3 player in the near future, so I just (today actually) started ripping all my albums. What I did was to rip a CD with the same songs ripped at 128, 160, 192, and 224kb/s, along with the original CD track and listened to it on a bunch of different playbacks. Even in my car, I could hear the difference of 128 vs 160. I'm not sure if I could hear the 192 difference (might have been my ears playing tricks on me), and the 212 was indistinguishable. I finally decided to rip everything at 192, just to be safe, and I'm planning on getting a larger player. But, I would recommend anybody doing that same experiment. If you can't hear the difference, then there's no reason to use up all the extra space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkendubber Posted April 25, 2005 Report Share Posted April 25, 2005 128 is what i have all of my music encoded to but since i've damaged the fuck out of my ears growing up, i personally cant tell the difference between 128, 160, 192. That being said. If you are an audiophile you will be completely satisfied with 192 it covers a lot of frequencies and not much is lost. if space is your key factor and you've fucked your ears with 15" subwoofers your whole life then 128 will be fine. Otherwise go 192. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SilverCivic Posted April 25, 2005 Report Share Posted April 25, 2005 All standard Digital Audio Comes In The Format *.wav. This is what you find on cd’s and md’s. If you are famular with what a *.zip file is then your familiar with the theory behind *.mp3 or *.wma. When you compress a *.wav file down there are two types of normal formats, the *.mp3 (universal) or Windows Media Audio file *.wma. Depending on what program you use to compress it or what setting you have set in you options files is what file type and compression rate you end up with. If you have over 7 gigs of data and only 550 songs then you probably have a lot of *.wav files on your hard drive. A *.wav file is about 5-15 times larger than a compressed file. You can get an mp3 encoder or decoder at www.cnet.com or you can use most jukebox programs to do it. Just open you music files and look at your icons in the list format to see what you have as *.mp3, *.wma, or as *.wav. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mensan Posted April 25, 2005 Report Share Posted April 25, 2005 Actually, CD's are *.cda files. When you remove them from your CD, you may do so without any data loss by converting them to *.wav files, but they are still different. I think your theory is correct, but you are wrong about a couple of things you mentioned. Also, a good program (that is free) to convert music from .mp3 to .wav or vice versa is Audacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lustalbert Posted April 25, 2005 Report Share Posted April 25, 2005 personally i do all my ripping in 320k. it takes a little extra space, but having the cuality when i rip burn back to cds is nice. besides, a 250 gb hdd isnt that expensive any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
large_x7 Posted April 25, 2005 Report Share Posted April 25, 2005 Originally posted by Lustalbert (more used cars than CR): personally i do all my ripping in 320k. it takes a little extra space, but having the cuality when i rip burn back to cds is nice. besides, a 250 gb hdd isnt that expensive any more. Yeah, but then I wouldn't be able to fit my 400+ CD collection on a 40gig player (I'm not sure that I'll be able to at 192, either!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.