Posted by JuanPablo
Hi all
I have a question. I have a 2GB Memory Stick Pro Duo and I use it with my W700. But it's nearly full and I want to store more songs
I've uploaded all my songs in 192 kbps. My question is... is 160 kbps enough? The quality is (almost) the same? Is there a huge difference between 192 and 160 kbps?
I listen to music with the headset (included in my W700, I don't know the name
)
Thanks in advance
[ This Message was edited by: JuanPablo on 2007-05-23 21:22 ]
Posted by Marc_SE
My suggestion for queries like this is always:
encode a song at various bitrates i.e. 96kbps, 128kbps, 160kbps and listen to each. Choose with your ears and encode accordingly based on your decision.
Posted by umerhayat
l use 128kbps and i think they are ok to listen
This message was posted from a P910i
Posted by antichrist
imo, if you use your music to listen on the phone, 96 is enough. but if you want to listen to music on your stereo via phone, 160 and more
Posted by JuanPablo
On 2007-05-23 22:24:22, Marc_SE wrote:
My suggestion for queries like this is always:
encode a song at various bitrates i.e. 96kbps, 128kbps, 160kbps and listen to each. Choose with your ears and encode accordingly based on your decision.
Ok, I'll try that, thanks
BTW, in which quality are your MP3 files?
EDIT: I need more opinions people. To all the people that own a Walkman phone: in which quality you have your music? 192 kbps? 160? 128?
[ This Message was edited by: JuanPablo on 2007-05-23 21:59 ]
[ This Message was edited by: JuanPablo on 2007-05-23 22:00 ]
Posted by antichrist
mine are 128 and more. same on computer
one album is even 320
_________________
in peace, a death is a tragedy, in war, a million deaths are just a statistic
ericsson t65>nokia 3510i>nokia 6020>SE k750i> SE k800i> SE m600i
[ This Message was edited by: antichrist on 2007-05-23 21:58 ]
Posted by Dogmann
@antichrsit.
I really can not agree with 96kbps being good enough especially not if in MP3, but then i suppose not everyone has the same requirements for quality. Personally i wouldn't use the bundled headphones that came with my device either and would rather have quality over quantity any day. My set up is in my signature and i will listen to Music for 1 hour or two straight, if it wasn't of a good quality that would just be horrible. I encode @ 160kbps AAC which in my set up produces a full rich sound.
Marc
_________________
Nokia E61 2gb Sandisk, Fring, Tom Tom 6, AD-46 with Black Shure EC2g
[ This Message was edited by: Dogmann on 2007-05-23 22:22 ]
Posted by antichrist
i agree with you, but can you feel the difference between 96 and 160 on phone? (i mean on speaker, not the headphones)
as you can see from the above post, i also want quality over quantity(that's why i even have some songs at 320)
sometimes i play music from my phone at parties; last friday i was asked to play some music in a small club from my phone since there was a problem at the computer with club's music. so quality all the way
Posted by Dogmann
@antichrist,
Oh the beauty of living in the digital age as otherwise how big a Record Box would you of needed to have that much Music with you and just happen to have it with you at that time.
But this is the point i am trying to make a phone should have a good enough player that if you encode your music in high enough quality and use good head phones it can can comfortably replace the need for a dedicated MP3 player as otherwise IMO what's the point. I could not dream of trying to listen to Music on any phones built in speaker as really it is designed for voice not for Music and the whole point of good headphones is they will sound better than speakers as everything is channeled straight into the ear. Listening through headphones you hear parts of the track you miss through speakers for me good headphones produce a better result and are my preference.
Marc
_________________
Nokia E61 2gb Sandisk, Fring, Tom Tom 6, AD-46 with Black Shure EC2g
[ This Message was edited by: Dogmann on 2007-05-23 22:40 ]
Posted by Yanosh94
On my computer the totality of my music are in 128kbps , for the phone i use he-aac for don't waste space.
Posted by amanno1
All mine are 320
Posted by decay_zeit
my mp3's are at least at 128kbps...sure 128kbps is not enough for a pro music listener but may do the work in everyday listening...for years i used to convert my mp3's to 128kbps due to memory lacking of my mp3 player but all of a sudden i realized the issue that quality ALWAYS should be prefered and now that i know the fact,i'd never waste my time listening to mp3's having bit rate less than 160kbps........
those times i couldn't realize the difference between 128 and higher,and had been kept saying there is not much difference especially when using portable speakers or mid-quality earphones(ofcourse i knew i was cheating myself but couldn't help it coz wanted more music with me)...now that i have a 1GB M2(still not enough though,but at least would handle a 2-3 day mood) i clearly see the priority of quality and now that i'm not cheating my self no more,the difference shows itself...
so take my advice,the higher the bit-rate of mp3 is,the more you enjoy your music(even if you can't realize the difference)...
so curiouse just wondering how come 2GB is not enough ???definetly you would not listen to all these gigs periodicaly in few days.all 2 gigs are not in the same mood and the mood of a certain music doesn't come back everyday,then i would have changed my music through pc every 3-4 days if i were in your shoes(as i'm doing so...)
thanks...
+ : i'm hopefully looking forward to seeing days when i can store my 280GB music archive on my M2 Memory stick at once and having all of it with me when i insert the memory stick into my k800(
ofcourse in those days i have nor k800 niether M2 
)
_________________
finding beauty in the dissonance...
[ This Message was edited by: decay_zeit on 2007-05-24 00:48 ]
Posted by DarkKrypt
i suggest
160kbps with 48000hz
or
192kbps with 44100hz
difference is 192kbps is larger by 1mb (song was 4.77mb from the 160kbps - now its 5.72),,dont see much difference but its better than selecting 256,320kbps for your phones music
_________________
aKa Chiller
[ This Message was edited by: DarkKrypt on 2007-05-24 00:51 ]
Posted by supers33d
80kbps contstant or vbr is the minimum for good enough quality running 44khz anything below pah is like listening to radio quality
Posted by kennyUIQ3
96 Kbps(radio quality) will do enough for me, 128Kbps is the standard CD quality. if you are not so buffy with audio quality, you can hardly discern the differences between the two.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2007-05-24 05:44:40, kennyUIQ3 wrote:
96 Kbps(radio quality) will do enough for me, 128Kbps is the standard CD quality. if you are not so buffy with audio quality, you can hardly discern the differences between the two.
The claim that 128Kbps is "CD Quality" is rather optimistic to say the least. 320Kbps is what's called "Near CD quality". The only thing you can call "CD Quality" is the uncompressed audio stream ripped digitally off a CD.
Posted by rad2905
I just don't understand the question.
Actually, I do, just, that question is valid if you're encoding from CD, otherwise the quality can only be degraded, not improved.
Re-encoding from 128 to 192 or higher has no effect, since the source is lower quality. So, by re-encoding the lower bitrate file to higher bitrate file, you simply get the fila that takes more space, and has the same quality.
Peace...
Posted by QVGA
128kbps MP3 at 44000Hz is enough for me.
Posted by batesie
i encode all my mp3's in 320 or 256Kbps, but i'd say the lowest you can go to for general listening on the move is 128Kbps at 22khz
at 128kbps you are basically deleting 90% of the original CD data, and all the sounds it thinks the human ear cant hear anyway. it simply guesses what should fill in the gaps!!!!
Posted by Ranjith
128 or 162....
dont even think of 96!
R
Posted by bulti48
Using VBR rather than constant will produce a better sound.
If testing different bitrates then listen to the drums, in particular the high hats, to help measure your preferred standard for encoding.
Posted by batesie
i use a 'reference' track that i know off by heart and have heard on stereo's worth £10 to HiFi's worth £10,000
also comes in handy when trying out different levels of compression.
Posted by thecell
My suggestion, you must convert all your songs to the better compression format song. if u want all your songs playing at 196kbps mp3 quality with less memory used, u can compress it to m4a aac 144kbps, or aac+ 128kbps, or even he-aac 96kbps, i hear the near same quality in my ear. Try it, u can save 20% for aac, 30% for aac+, 40% for he-aac (not same 4 all songs & not a fixed calculation, but can be used for comparison).
before compress, make sure ur phone support the codec, i knew w700 can play aac codec, but i dunno if the other codec too.
ps : pls note that SE phone still can play the unsupported AAC format (AAC+,HEAAC), but it played at bad quality and rough, compare it with PC musics players (winamp etc)
- sorry 4 my bad english -
Posted by xan K
VBR (Variable Bit Rate) all the way for me! try to find a good size-quality ratio for your phone storage needs. for my phone I use VBR-5 (0= better quality, 9=smaller size). for my Zen Vision M (30GB) and my PC I use VBR-1.
You'll need CDex for that or any other CD ripper/encoder that supports the LAME MP3 code.
_________________
I will never EVER buy another Sony Ericsson joystick phone Again!!!
[ This Message was edited by: xan K on 2007-05-24 13:55 ]
Posted by max_wedge
On 2007-05-24 12:55:47, bulti48 wrote:
Using VBR rather than constant will produce a better sound.
If testing different bitrates then listen to the drums, in particular the high hats, to help measure your preferred standard for encoding.
I agree, VBR is much better than ABR, more consistant quality even in really complex pieces of audio and easier on the ears. But VBR is also 25-50% bigger in file size than ABR. I have been thinking of converting to VBR though I must admit. It's tempting. I'd rather a track in 160VBR than 192Kbps mp3 anyday even if they are the same size.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2007-05-23 22:22:40, JuanPablo wrote:
Hi all
I have a question. I have a 2GB Memory Stick Pro Duo and I use it with my W700. But it's nearly full and I want to store more songs
I've uploaded all my songs in 192 kbps. My question is... is 160 kbps enough? The quality is (almost) the same? Is there a huge difference between 192 and 160 kbps?
I listen to music with the headset (included in my W700, I don't know the name
)
Thanks in advance
[ This Message was edited by: JuanPablo on 2007-05-23 21:22 ]
Which format are you using, MP3 or AAC? With the SE headset (original handsfree or hpm-70), 160Kbps AAC or 192Kbps is probably a good compromise between size and quality. Keep in mind the less compression is used the better ANY headset will sound, unless it's one of those $2 jobbies
But if you are happy with the SE headsets, you will probably be satisfied with 160Kbps AAC, or even 128Kbps (use your own judgement: listen to a track encoded at both rates back to back. If one doesn't jump out as being much better than go with the smallest one)
Posted by Hobbs
I go with 128kbps.I dont go higher or lower than that.
Posted by Cycovision
I have to agree with Batesie here, but here's another interesting thing on the subject...
It depends on what type of music you listen to! For example, a complicated classical piece should be encoded at a high bit rate to ensure that none of the quiet sections or softer instruments become distorted or even left out. Also, the loss of clarity and 'muffling' that occurs with lower bit rates is much more noticible when listening to classical or vocal pieces
Happy Hardcore or Thrash metal, on the other hand, can be encoded at lower bit rates because they typically lack the 'musical detail' of other genres meaning that there's less chance of the track becoming spoiled through encoding. And often, they both deliberatley use distortion anyway so a little more from the encoding process doesn't make much difference!
Give it a try if you don't believe me
Posted by batesie
well said cyco and welcome back....
Posted by Sammy_boy
Generally 128Kbps, though I do prefer 160 or 192, I can certainly tell that a lot of data has been lost when listening to a 128kbps MP3, though the equivalent AAC sounds much better, just a shame many devices don't support that format!
Posted by vigoor
On 2007-05-23 22:22:40, JuanPablo wrote:
Hi all
I have a question. I have a 2GB Memory Stick Pro Duo and I use it with my W700. But it's nearly full and I want to store more songs
I've uploaded all my songs in 192 kbps. My question is... is 160 kbps enough? The quality is (almost) the same? Is there a huge difference between 192 and 160 kbps?
I listen to music with the headset (included in my W700, I don't know the name
)
Thanks in advance
[ This Message was edited by: JuanPablo on 2007-05-23 21:22 ]
It's better to encode all the songs in variable bitrate, i mean 128kbps variable will sound better than constant 128kbps. this way you will save more songs
Posted by ayejatt
MOST of mine are VBR with minimum 192kbps
Posted by fatreg
all mine hover about 220kbps VBR...
just what my mac see the audio as when I'm ripping it..
Posted by deluded
I rip most of my songs at 256kbps, cbr. Tried using 320kbps and vbr before, but unfortunately some of the devices I used didn't support them, so I now use 256kbps, cbr as most of the time there's no problem. Quality over quantity.
Posted by bombadil
I think 128kbps is a nice balance between sound quality and file size. One could say that the length of the song turns out to be the size of the file in mb!
_________________
I didn't let studies interfere with my education
=======================================
Motorola (Forgot Model) -> Mitsubishi Trium Eclipse -> Samsung SGH E700 -> Sony Ericsson
800i[ This Message was edited by: bombadil on 2007-05-31 21:01 ]
Posted by Ranjith
ok jst a question...
original AUDIO CD's have the best quality right?
so what format do you rip it to your PC?
R
Posted by crossmatched
aac and m4a are better formats than mp3. most sony ericsson handsets support them.
Posted by shivam007
u can try rm format..though the quality isn't much good..but they occupy onlyone-ifth the space
even mp3 at 128kbps ain't bad on a headset
Posted by max_wedge
On 2007-05-27 08:45:10, Ranjith wrote:
ok jst a question...
original AUDIO CD's have the best quality right?
so what format do you rip it to your PC?
R
if you want the SAME quality as cd, you need to use a lossless format. Trouble is a lossless format is about 20-30MB per song. So you use mp3 or aac ripped at a high bitrate, say 256 or 320Kbps. The it's about 8-10MB per song.
Posted by JuanPablo
Thanks for all your help guys
Now I've decided to convert some of my 192 kbps MP3 files to ACC. Now my question is... at which quality do I have to convert my files so they don't loose it quality? I've heard some saying 144kbps, other 160kbps (in ACC format). And which is the best program to convert MP3 files to ACC files?
Thanks in advance guys
Posted by antichrist
also, which type of aac? lc-aac, he-aac or he-aac v2?
Posted by EvoLifE
I used to encode my mp3's to m4a (aac+) at 28kbps, the quality was still great and the file size 1MB.
Posted by JuanPablo
On 2007-06-04 22:17:45, EvoLifE wrote:
I used to encode my mp3's to m4a (aac+) at 28kbps, the quality was still great and the file size 1MB.
Can you tell me which programm you used, please?
Posted by EvoLifE
Easy CD-DA Extractor
http://www.poikosoft.com/
Posted by JuanPablo
Thanks EvoLifE
Posted by blueberry287
Go here to see how to convert DVD/ video/ Audio to Mobile Phone.
http://www.esato.com/board/viewtopic.php?topic=153989
Posted by abbafan1972
I must admit, I find it difficult to tell the difference between various bit-rates. Mine are usually a minimum of 128.
Posted by themarques
I am actually getting quite hooked on DTS and AC3, sadly no mp3 can pump those out but then you would really need 5.1 headphones for that I am sure my Ultimate Ears could handle that...
Posted by Dogmann
Hi all
Well as this was originally about encoding for Mobile devices i used to think that 160kbps AAC produced very good results without producing to large a file size.
How ever after recently having had a major rethink of of my mobile device strategy i have for the first time bought a dedicated player.
Having just bought a 80gb iPod i chose the highest bit rate offered in iTunes for AAC which is @256kbps. Even though it has only been a few days i can easily say a dedicated device and a higher bit rate does indeed make a big difference. Although until now i had been quite happy with the results i have had so far. Whilst our mobile devices can produce more than adequate results they really can't compete with a dedicated player is my conclusion.
For now anyway i am happy with my new decision to have a separate device that does it each thing the best, and although it means carrying more than one device it really is worth carrying an additional device IMO. As i really do believe a truly great convergence device is yet to be with us. Maybe one day that will change but IMO not yet.
Marc
_________________
Nokia E61, 2gb Sandisk, Fring, Shure EC2g
Honoured to have won BEST DEBATER
[ This Message was edited by: Dogmann on 2007-09-05 23:07 ]