Which of these formats is highest quality?
- Thread starter WNxScythe
- Start date
Kenneth R.
Cináed
OGG>WMA>MP3(unless mp3 is high quality, where it can be =wma). i'm not sure about the others.
my computer converts all files before burning so i'm not sure what plays in a stereo as i don't know what filetype they are.
my computer converts all files before burning so i'm not sure what plays in a stereo as i don't know what filetype they are.
Post_Scriptum
Member
Henrik Main
Hello
Kenneth R.
Cináed
what? its true. and they are smaller file sizes as well... unless you encode mp3 at 192 or higher, wma is better.
OGG files are fucking horrible, they compress the mp3s making them lower quility(really low quality). They sound like low-fi cardboard crap. Atleast you can rule out OGG files as not an option. That's unless you want shit quality.
Kenneth R.
Cináed
Most people are smart enough not to compress already compressed files. You're only supposed to compress when doing the initial ripping.The Greys said:
Yeah, compressing an already compressed file can only result in weaker quality.
as for the initial post, from my own experience I'd say OGG>MPEG-4 AAC>MP3>WMA. No idea about MusePack MPC.
If you really want to go with the best possible quality, then rip in lossless. No loss in quality, only the file size tends to be rather big. I usually rip mine in FLAC, also very easy to convert them to lossy formats afterwards if you want to decrease the file size.
as for the initial post, from my own experience I'd say OGG>MPEG-4 AAC>MP3>WMA. No idea about MusePack MPC.
If you really want to go with the best possible quality, then rip in lossless. No loss in quality, only the file size tends to be rather big. I usually rip mine in FLAC, also very easy to convert them to lossy formats afterwards if you want to decrease the file size.
spaffe
Geisterglut
spaffe said:
Yeah, I use dBpowerAMP to convert them to MP3, with the latest LAME encoder and I usually rip my CD's with EAC to flac to back-up the originals.
MasterOLightning
Optimator
I don't know why everyone rags on .wma's so much. They're usually less than half the size of .mp3's. They take half as long to download, if speed is an issue with your connection. The size is nice if you like to copy all your cds on to your hard drive. I tend to own most of the music I have, so I don't burn that much music, unless I plan on giving stuff to friends, or copying rare albums, etc. I'm not really bothered by the slightly worse sound quality of .wma's. I've never had problems playing cds with .wma's on either car stereos or cd players otherwise.
Post_Scriptum
Member
Err why would you use OGG for music...ever? the mpeg-4 is 2nd best to mp3.
nothing beats high quality mp3 other then mp2 but thats not available to mainstream users yet.
nothing beats high quality mp3 other then mp2 but thats not available to mainstream users yet.
Erik said:
Because out of files I download, the ones that are OGG sound like the most shit. I posted my opinion using my ears, fuck you if you don't like it.
And if OGG files are such shit you have to put them through a program to convert them. They suck even more for being a big pain in the ass. Fuck OGG files and fuck you. Some people want to listen to mp3s. Not spend all night trying to convert files in a program you nerd.
Hell Mike
fuck melodic black metal
DE
vote bnp
STOP TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT PLEASE THANKS
Of the common lossy codecs, your best choices will be Vorbis (.ogg) and MP3 (.mp3).
Vorbis is a superior codec to MP3, but MP3 is likely to be a better choice for most needs since it's the standard format; you're never going to find a portable player, for example, that doesn't play MP3.
Rip in at least -q5 Vorbis or at least --alt-preset standard MP3 (with LAME) and you'll get lovely quality music. If I was just ripping for a personal collection that I wasn't going to share, I'd use Vorbis; if you're going to be sharing these, or compatability is an issue, then go with MP3.
Of the common lossy codecs, your best choices will be Vorbis (.ogg) and MP3 (.mp3).
Vorbis is a superior codec to MP3, but MP3 is likely to be a better choice for most needs since it's the standard format; you're never going to find a portable player, for example, that doesn't play MP3.
Rip in at least -q5 Vorbis or at least --alt-preset standard MP3 (with LAME) and you'll get lovely quality music. If I was just ripping for a personal collection that I wasn't going to share, I'd use Vorbis; if you're going to be sharing these, or compatability is an issue, then go with MP3.
DE
vote bnp
The Greys said:
When you encode to a lossy codec, you remove data from the file - that's why an MP3 is considerably smaller than the original lossless files on a CD. Now, if you do this once, then it's fine - your MP3 encoder will try and remove sound that you can't physically hear, so you can't tell the difference.
Now, if you then take that lossy file and try and convert it to a lossy file, the encoder will treat that file the same as an original audio source, and remove data from it, resulting in even lower quality. Once you've taken away the data, there's no way of getting it back; you have to re-rip from the original source.
Converting from one lossy format to the other and then complaining that it sounds like shit is only showing how much of a clueless idiot you are, not how bad the codec is
