Can you tell the difference between 128kbps vs. 320 kbps MP3?
- Thread starter keysersoze
- Start date
well i picked the 320 version so i guess yes
K
kwazdog
Guest
hell yeah.... listen for ambiance not frequency... they all sound like shit (mp3) really, but its convenient... 
I always do 320 at the highest settings...
I always do 320 at the highest settings...
i can less distortion in sound, more crisper sound in 320 kps
Sound quality. Doesn't make that big of a difference on the small headphones though.
lol I would have bet money I picked the right one...but I was wrong 
idk about this thing. I normally can always tell the difference
idk about this thing. I normally can always tell the difference
Yes, I can tell the difference, but it really doesn't matter to the average listener considering the fact that most of us have crappy systems.
Picked correctly, but I had to listen 3 times before I decided, and I still wasn't 100% sure. So essentially, I guessed.
Does this mean my desktop speakers are shit or am I just accustomed to shitty sounding music?
btw, I rip cd's at 320 kbps or look for mp3s that are 192 kbps and better. But this shit did make a ninja pause.
Does this mean my desktop speakers are shit or am I just accustomed to shitty sounding music?
btw, I rip cd's at 320 kbps or look for mp3s that are 192 kbps and better. But this shit did make a ninja pause.
It depends on the equipment it's played on. The majority of the music on my pc is in 192-320kbs. It's slowly being converted to FLAC which is far superior to any MP3 source. Check out RunawaySlave's Lossless thread to get some good shit
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=174201
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=174201
I couldn't tell the difference. I've been hearing a lot about FLAC. Can you give us a little background? What's the difference between it and an MP3 file?
I can tell the difference on certain cd's that I d/l because I know what I'm lookin' for as far as inconsistencies in the sound... But I was wrong as hell with this one
c/s
Play that shit on a halfway decent system, and you got to turn your system down. The distortion will have you crying.
I noticed instantly...but I'm a producer/audio engineer so maybe that's why. I don't think the average person really could tell a big difference. 
I picked right after the first listen...the trebles sound clearer on the 320 version. Cymbals and the high notes in the singing...but unless your making music or proaudio it really doesn't matter. You'd have to be a fucking nerd to care about that difference otherwise.
I could tell the difference.
this is relevant to me. out of 15,000 songs on my ipod i have about 2,500 at 128kbps. i just started replacing all those songs w/new versions @ 192 or better. i found a site that has thousands of old school r&b singles at 256k and 320k. on my home system and car now the higher bitrates don't make a big difference, but when i upgrade my systems i want to be ready with the quality shit.
What's Up with that link?
i have the link saved at work, where i do most of my downloading. up this thread tomorrow morning or pm me and i'll drop it.
I noticed instantly...but I'm a producer/audio engineer so maybe that's why. I don't think the average person really could tell a big difference.
c/s
I can't tell the difference but my sound system can.
To Coolie:
When you rip a CD, its done in wave format. So all these music files are compressed from the original wave files. Anytime you compress a music file to MP3 (lossy) format, it loses quality. One of the biggest differences between FLAC and MP3 is that a FLAC file is only compressed ONCE while the highest quality MP3 (320kbps) is compressed at least 4 times. But with FLAC, it is compressed in a way where it doesn't lose any quality whatsoever (lossless). So while it may be a somewhat large file, it is still only about 60% the size of the original wave. Meanwhile, those 128kbps (kilobits per second) files Keysersoze asked about are much smaller, but that's because they are compressed 12 times each, so you can only imagine the degradation of the original song. That's cool if you're on the street listening on some crappy Ipod, but when you get home and throw it on your stereo, it makes a BIG difference in the sound quality.
FLAC (and other lossless formats...my fav is wavpack) are GREAT for archiving music
To Coolie:
When you rip a CD, its done in wave format. So all these music files are compressed from the original wave files. Anytime you compress a music file to MP3 (lossy) format, it loses quality. One of the biggest differences between FLAC and MP3 is that a FLAC file is only compressed ONCE while the highest quality MP3 (320kbps) is compressed at least 4 times. But with FLAC, it is compressed in a way where it doesn't lose any quality whatsoever (lossless). So while it may be a somewhat large file, it is still only about 60% the size of the original wave. Meanwhile, those 128kbps (kilobits per second) files Keysersoze asked about are much smaller, but that's because they are compressed 12 times each, so you can only imagine the degradation of the original song. That's cool if you're on the street listening on some crappy Ipod, but when you get home and throw it on your stereo, it makes a BIG difference in the sound quality.
FLAC (and other lossless formats...my fav is wavpack) are GREAT for archiving music
Last edited:
co-sign on that link too
on a another note anyone know of a good site to download full albums all in one shot ???
my hard drive crashed & I lost some of my recent stuff !!!
Similar threads
