Rediscovering CD sound

[Popmartijn]

Dear Readers,

Forgive me if this has been addressed before but is 192 kbps the most optimal speed for importing? Can one get better quality at higher speed/bit rate? But will higher quality sacrifice memory space? Eagerly awaiting your reply,

Clueless in Central Jersey

Yes, a higher bit rate means you get a better quality. A consequence of the higher quality is that the files will be bigger. That's the trade-off.
As for which bit rate is the most optimal, that depends on a couple of factors (what you're using for playback, where you listen to the music, how well your own hearing is).

I use 192 kbps for my files, but that's just for listening to music on my computer (I don't have an iPod or similar device). Many might recommend either 256 kbps or 320 kbps.

PS: When you burn a CD from an iTunes playlist, do you get that quality back on CD again?

Nope. What's lost by ripping a CD and converting the full sound to MP3 files, remains lost. Burning it again to a CD won't make it better.

 

[Zoots]

Thanks for the answers.

But can't you burn the CD at a higher bit rate or whatever to get back the original quality?

 

[phanan]

It doesn't matter what mp3 bit rate you use - it's less than CD quality. The only way you can retain CD quality is by using lossless files (Apple lossless, wav, etc.), and obviously, those take up tons of space.

 

[the tourist]

I never listen to cds anymore. They're much less practical than computers and/or iPods.

 

[Diemen]

Thanks for the answers.

But can't you burn the CD at a higher bit rate or whatever to get back the original quality?

You can't regain quality from mp3s - the CD sound quality is lost permanently once you rip it to an mp3 file, so the quality is stuck at whatever bit rate you ripped it at, regardless of whether you burn it to cd or not. The data for full quality isn't hiding anywhere, it's just not there at all (hence the smaller file sizes the lower the bit rate).

192 is a good compromise between sound quality and file size if you're just going to be listening casually. Most of my collection is ripped at 192, but for the past year or so I've been ripping everything I get at minimum 256, and usually higher (either max vbr or 320). I can't tell the difference between 320k and CD sound, and 256 is pushing it, too (usually it's in the cymbals and higher registers that the differences are most apparent). Hard drive space is so cheap these days I'm not as concerned with saving space as before.

 

[u2popmofo]

Part of me wants to go back and re-rip everything I have at a much higher rate, but I think all the time it would take to do that would make me go insane. Well, more insane than I already am....

 

[the tourist]

Part of me wants to go back and re-rip everything I have at a much higher rate, but I think all the time it would take to do that would make me go insane. Well, more insane than I already am....

I've thought about that too.

 

[gman]

Am going the opposite way...and loooking to purchse a turntable to get back into collecting vinyl

 

[GibsonGirl]

Part of me wants to go back and re-rip everything I have at a much higher rate, but I think all the time it would take to do that would make me go insane. Well, more insane than I already am....

I did that a while ago. I wiped everything off my hard drive (actually, my computer did that for me of its own accord -- thanks, HP! -- but I won't get into that now) and re-ripped my albums at 256/320 kbps. It took an eternity, but it was worth it.

 

[UberBeaver]

I still like the hiss and scratch of a record. Bring back Vinyl!

 

[gman]

Yeah UB....BRING BACK VINYL!! There is something intresting about vinyl that you dont get thro collecting CDs. Only downside is you need to get of yer ass every so often to change sides