| Author |
Is there a way to compress mp3 files ? |
Nixxi
Joined: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 51
PM, WWW
|
Yep. Musicmatch. But dont overdo it. Because when bitrate is lowered, sound quality is lessened. An mp3 with 128kbps is the minimum i can go. |
|
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
exactly. The more I listen to higher bitrates, the more crap lower ones sound. I'm up to 192Kbps AAC or 256Kbps mp3 BARE MINIMUM so far. I prefer 320 if possible.
|
crossmatched
Joined: Jan 05, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: RP
PM, WWW
|
Mp3 is already a compressed, lossy format. The acceptable near-cd quality is 128kbps.
Compressing mp3 further will result to an inferior quality sounding track file. So it would boil down to quantity vs quality issue:
more mp3s of lesser quality or lesser mp3s of more quality?
The only format that sounds good even at 64kbps is Sony's proprietary ATRAC format. Too bad it didn't get that popular like mp3 did.
Imo Sony could have pushed up the popularity of ATRAC had it allowed SE to include ATRAC as a supported format by the earth's 1st walkman phone, W800. 
www.secondmanonthemoon.blogspot.com
we are all works under progress |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I doubt it. They removed the DRM restrictions too late in the game.
|
yea g
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: New Zealand
PM, WWW
|
well I do use ATRAC on my psp, but I don't think my phone supports it
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
No the phones never supported ATRAC. (Other than the Japanese market)
Even the latest Sony Walkman players don't support ATRAC anymore.
Sony have dropped the codec more or less.
|
StevenC
Joined: Aug 23, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: NY
PM |
I have keen hearing and my hobby is working with sounds. From my experiences, compressing a high-bitrate (> 172kbps) mp3 to 96kbps with the latest Lame MP3 Encoder v3.98.2 is the best compromise between size and sound quality.
96kbps is very good for classical and pop music in fact. You would hear few artifacts if you pay attention to. But for electronic/techno, 112kpbs is more acceptable.
|
groovepeppy
Joined: Dec 05, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Parijs van Java, Indonesia
PM |
I believe what you really mean is mp3pro with 96kbps, well it will sound like common 96kbps mp3 if we put it on the phond cause i've never heard any phone that support mp3pro...
You will only hear it sounds good if you play it on a player with mp3pro support...
Black Sensation Z710e - Black Apollo 9360 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-10-26 16:30:34, StevenC wrote:
I have keen hearing and my hobby is working with sounds. From my experiences, compressing a high-bitrate (> 172kbps) mp3 to 96kbps with the latest Lame MP3 Encoder v3.98.2 is the best compromise between size and sound quality.
96kbps is very good for classical and pop music in fact. You would hear few artifacts if you pay attention to. But for electronic/techno, 112kpbs is more acceptable.
as groovepeppy said, mp3pro doesn't work on most cellphones. You get normal mp3 fallback.
But even if you could get mp3pro at 96Kbps, as you say it's equivalent to 172Kbps. Personally I find 256Kbps a bare minimum for my own listening pleasure (and my hearing is good but not fantastic by any means).
There is an assumption made by some (I used to think this myself) that a relatively low quality audio device such as a phone or mp3 player is too poor to reveal any improvement in higher bitrates compared to standard rates such as 128 mp3, 96 mp3pro/aac etc.
However my testing has revealed the opposite. I find that it is MORE important on a low quality device to use a high bitrate high quality codec. I guess it's like this: low quality x low quality = very low quality. Whereas: low quality x high quality = not quite so low quality.
Since using 256 and 320Kbps where possible on my mp3 players and phones I find the music much more pleasant and more full than when I used to use 96-128Kbps AAC or 128-192Kbps mp3
|
StevenC
Joined: Aug 23, 2008
Posts: > 500
From: NY
PM |
On 2008-10-27 01:27:32, groovepeppy wrote:
I believe what you really mean is mp3pro with 96kbps, well it will sound like common 96kbps mp3 if we put it on the phond cause i've never heard any phone that support mp3pro...
You will only hear it sounds good if you play it on a player with mp3pro support...
No it's not mp3pro. That one is really no good.
|
Nixxi
Joined: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 51
PM, WWW
|
Yup. I agree. I'm into the string quartet recordings and most of them are at 320kbs. Compressing them to even 172 would be like listening to garbage. I dont have keen hearing but the low quality is discernible. |
groovepeppy
Joined: Dec 05, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Parijs van Java, Indonesia
PM |
For audiophile ears i recommend using at least 256 kbps for your song collections, and use the compressed mp3 only for your ringtones 
Black Sensation Z710e - Black Apollo 9360 |
lukechris
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Preston, UK
PM, WWW
|
Most  's (not all though) can't really cope with the high bitrate's ruch as the ones we get on a CD (320). I reccomending compressing no less than 100 so that the sound quality doesn't decrease at all to the ear but the size decreases to the phone
|
miguel82
Joined: Feb 14, 2006
Posts: 414
From: Portugal
PM |
Convert .mp3 to .ogg and use oggplayer to listen them. You can get the same audio quality for about half size. When i had p800 and the maximum memory you can get is 128mb this is the best choice. And for what i remember oggplayer is a uiq freeware app plus is nicer than the built in audio player of p800. You can store a lot of tracks on a 128mb card;) |
lukechris
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Preston, UK
PM, WWW
|
OggPlayer 
That must be awkward when you want to listen to a song.
Go open an application, then browse for song.
Plus it will drain battery.
Compress MP3's I say
|
|
|
Posted: 2008-10-26 02:21
