What Kbps is best?

[orionlion82]

losless wma here as well.

 

[TollhouseFrank]

I usually do mp3 at 384k or 512k... hehehe

 

[eNightmare]

I have all my music at 256 Kbps, but my new Audigy sound card advertises 198 Kbps. Is the extra Kbps just taking up space? I mean, if I change all my music to 198, will I hear any difference?

If you do re-render your music, you will lose additional quality. Everytime you render mp3's you lose certain frequency regardless of the quality.

 

[jenko]

If you have a new version of nero rip using the MP4 format they say a 92k MP4 is the same as a 192k MP3, so a smaller filesize same quality.
In MP3 format i think 320k is good quality, so in MP4 i bet 192k is just as good.

 

[khiloa]

I don't feel like writing a long post so I will just say check this site out, there is endless information there about every kind of codec and encoder and decoder ever. Check it out.

 

[JigPu]

Personally I find 192Kbps is perfect. I've got pretty good speakers and OK ears, so I can hear the difference betwen 128 and 192, though any higher and I can't. Just wasted space. Lately I've been encoding to FLAC though since I have the space and don't trust my CDs to live long in their current environment...

JigPu

 

[zexmarquies01]

i usually have my MP3's be 256 - 360 in VBR. I have grown to love VBR.

maybe its just me and my ears. but i like my songs to have good qualiy. If that means they use more space, than so be it. i hate listening to low quality music.

 

[X1ggy]

For the most part, I also rip to 192. Anything lower I can definitely tell the difference, especially on high-end stuff and cymbals. Lower bitrates make the music sound tinny and "watery", if you know what I mean. For me, 192 is a good medium between sound quality & disk space. If I had the disk space, I would go lossless.

X1g