Can You Hear The Difference Between A 128 And 320 kbps MP3 File?
I’ve just found a great page that plays an MP3 encoded at both 128kbps and 320kbps and challenges listeners to spot the better quality file. It’s an interesting test, and it’ll be interesting to see if Connected Internet readers can spot the difference. Don’t forget to come back and let other readers know how good your ‘ear’ is.
I could tell the difference, although I had to listen to the files on a decent set of speakers. Where you tend to listen to your files should determine how you encode your files. If disk space is at a premium and you only listen to your tracks on an MP3 player through a pair of generally poor speakers, then 128kbps files should be ok. However, if you listen to your files on a decent hifi, or intend to in the future, then you will benefit from the higher bit rates.
This is the situation I find myself in. When I got my first iPod back in 2003 I started encoding my files at 128kbps so that I could fit as many tracks as possible onto my 15GB iPod. However, I realised too late that in the future I would probably have a bigger device, so I should encode my files at the highest quality possible so that I wouldn’t have to spend many hours ripping my CDs again. So, I went back and re-ripped all my CDs at 320kbps.
This has served me well for 5 years, although I’m currently in the process of re-ripping my CDs in a loseless format (I’m using FLAC via MediaMonkey). I have a very good stereo system connected to main media center PC, where I can clearly hear the difference between even 320kbps and loseless files. Once I’ve completed this (it will take a few months…) I intend to put away my CDs forever and then turn my attention to ripping my LPs by purchasing a USB turntable.
Bookmark & Share
Related Posts
- Leaving iTunes Behind - Moving To MediaMonkey And Lossless Music
- 'Fastest' DVD To iPod Converter
- How To Remove Personal Information From iTunes DRM-free Songs
- What Do You Think Of The New iPod Range?
- New iPod Announcement Coming Today
- Music Downloads over 3G: Who is using this service?
- Dension Gateway 500 iPod Integration Review
Loading ...
Comment by Zath on 6 July 2008:
I can tell the difference between 128 and 192, but higher than that it pretty much all sounds the same to me…I think
Read Zath’s latest blog post….Football Manager 2008 - Cheap Bargain on PC!>>>
Comment by MB Web Design on 19 June 2008:
To be frank, I can’t tell the difference in a regular setting, but if you turn on a vocal remover in Winamp the difference is clear - 128k mp3s will sound like they’re recorded underwater!
Comment by Komodo Dragon on 5 June 2008:
I think it also depends on the song you are playing. Some songs you can tell the difference more easily than others.
Comment by Mosey on 30 May 2008:
I can’t help but feel a wee bit chuffed that I did get it right
Am listening with ear phones although ideally I would have used my big speakers! I did have to listen to it a few times to be sure though (just in case) - now I try and rip everything to 320kbps. I’m using ‘Exact Audio Copy’ and despite whatever one says, am still using mp3 since it seems to be the most transferable.
Comment by Rob O. on 29 May 2008:
With good earbuds, I can tell a diff. I went with 192k on all of my MP3 files. Like Michael, I think 192k is a very reasonable compromise.
I do get a big kick outta guys who insist that they must have 320kbps and then do the vast majority of their listening in the car. Road noise trumps audio fidelity any day of the week…
Read Rob O.’s latest blog post….How Am I Unlike a Turnip?>>>