bitrate converter software?

General software, Operating Systems, and Programming discussion.
Everything from software questions, OSes, simple HTML to scripting languages, Perl, PHP, Python, MySQL, VB, C++ etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
7thkevin
Senior Member
Posts: 3871
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Illinois

bitrate converter software?

Post by 7thkevin »

im lookin for a software that can change music that I allready downloaded and make the bitrate lower..

and for those wondering why lower... its for my gf ipod nano.. she wants alot of music and dont have much room.. TIA

BTW is there a way to get music off the ipod?
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Converting an already compressed MP3 to a lower bitrate is going to make it sound like dog taint.
User avatar
7thkevin
Senior Member
Posts: 3871
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Illinois

Post by 7thkevin »

Burke wrote:Converting an already compressed MP3 to a lower bitrate is going to make it sound like dog taint.

even from like 198 maybe a lil biger to 128?
User avatar
Jamie_R
Posts: 10451
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: NC

Post by Jamie_R »

7thkevin wrote: BTW is there a way to get music off the ipod?
maybe through iTunes?
.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
User avatar
Jamie_R
Posts: 10451
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: NC

Post by Jamie_R »

7thkevin wrote:even from like 198 maybe a lil biger to 128?
:nod: you would've been better off ripping the cd @ 128 to begin with ...
.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Despite what Downhill and others here will say, most people can't tell the difference between standard 128 kbps and anything higher, unless the person who ripped the music was a moron and used Joint Stereo (aka Doctor Phasoid).

128 kbps 44.1 Khz STEREO and keep the file sizes down.
User avatar
YARDofSTUF
Posts: 70006
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2000 12:00 am
Location: USA

Post by YARDofSTUF »

128 joint stereo would even be fine for crappy ipod headphones.
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 13238
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2001 12:00 am
Location: .

Post by Mark »

User avatar
downhill
Posts: 34799
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: My Own Private Idaho

Post by downhill »

Burke wrote:Despite what Downhill and others here will say, most people can't tell the difference between standard 128 kbps and anything higher, unless the person who ripped the music was a moron and used Joint Stereo (aka Doctor Phasoid).

128 kbps 44.1 Khz STEREO and keep the file sizes down.
I do tend to agree with Burke here, that most can't tell a differece. If they can't tell the difference, it's because they're either deaf or have never learned to actually listen to the music.

Burke is right. Taking a compressed file and recompressing it, isn't a good idea. It doens't matter what file it was originally. It was already compressed. Those are bits you can never get back. So you compress it again, and even at a bitrate of 320, your still compressing the file. So you toss away more bits.
User avatar
knightmare
Posts: 6067
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 10:53 am

Post by knightmare »

for the GF? da*n da*n dam*.........
“"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer."”

Bruce Lee
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Well, I for one have 40% hearing loss in my right ear and 10% in my left, so I can't tell the difference...and neither can most people I know who have normal hearing. The people don't "know how" to listen deal smacks of wine snobbery.
User avatar
downhill
Posts: 34799
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: My Own Private Idaho

Post by downhill »

Burke wrote:Well, I for one have 40% hearing loss in my right ear and 10% in my left, so I can't tell the difference...and neither can most people I know who have normal hearing. The people don't "know how" to listen deal smacks of wine snobbery.
Maybe but I'm a beer or wiskey drinker. Wine for dinner about twice a year.

Really it's NOT that hard to tell. You just need to listen for artifacts.
User avatar
YARDofSTUF
Posts: 70006
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2000 12:00 am
Location: USA

Post by YARDofSTUF »

downhill wrote:Maybe but I'm a beer or wiskey drinker. Wine for dinner about twice a year.

Really it's NOT that hard to tell. You just need to listen for artifacts.
It depends on the speakers as well. Those crappy ear buds always sound like crap, protable cd player headphones arent much better. Its easier to tell in my logitech z560s, and really easy with my sony V700s and car speakers.
User avatar
loop2kil
SG Elite
Posts: 5231
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Atlanta GA

Post by loop2kil »

I can tell a difference with my Klipsch's...128 is missing too much to be acceptable to me...192 or up for me.

Adobe Audition will do what you want it to but its not cheap.
User avatar
TonyT
SG VIP
Posts: 10356
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Fairfax, VA

Post by TonyT »

Windows Media Player can save-as any bit rate you want, lower & higher. (up to 320 if have the lame.dll)
No one has any right to force data on you
and command you to believe it or else.
If it is not true for you, it isn't true.

LRH
Joe
SG Elite
Posts: 8585
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2001 7:36 pm
Location: USA

Post by Joe »

:p :rtfm: :confused: :cry: :cry: :mad: :rockin: :(
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
····

····
User avatar
Jim
SG VIP
Posts: 13229
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 12:00 am

Post by Jim »

downhill wrote:Really it's NOT that hard to tell. You just need to listen for artifacts.
:nod:

My ears are far from an audiophile's, but I can hear a recognizable difference between an MP3 @ 128 and the source CD. Granted, it may be more obvious with certain types of music (such as something symphonic) than others, but I can usually hear it, even with my crappy speakers.

However, as Yard said, if you're just listening to it through standard iPod headphones or generic speakers, 128 is probably more than fine.
User avatar
David
SG Elite
Posts: 9393
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Nova Caesarea

Post by David »

Better equipment will reveal flaws in the source material.

Hell_Yes

Luck is where preparation meets opportunity - Seneca

"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov

It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book. - Friedrich Nietzsche
cam123240
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:22 am

Post by cam123240 »

hahahaha!! 128kb/s, i cant even imagine such garbage. ;)

the best program to use for ripping anything in true quality is EAC, Exact Audio Copy. they have a website and a free download, just go check it out. it will rip out to like 1,411 kb/s. now that is music, even if each music file averages like 40megabytes.

EAC will also inform you of any errors, where they are in the track, and also will attempt to fix errors if you want it to. it displays the list of any errors detected, and allows to you quickly push play and it will skip ahead to any trouble areas for yor final approval. :D :D :D :D :D

get it for max quality, but if you want to save space, 128kb/s in WMA should be just fine. :D
Seasonace

Post by Seasonace »

Windows Media Player, Audigy.. there are a number of programs out there that can convert bitrates of audio files.
Post Reply