Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method


Go Back   Computer Help Articles > Windows Media Player
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-05-2006, 04:15 PM
jpas1954
 
Posts: n/a
Default Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method

Like a lot of people, Santa brought me an MP3 player this year. When I go
into Media Player and want to rip files, I notice not only that there are 4
choices (WMA, variable bit, lossless, MP3) but that each one has a slider
allowing you to modify size vs. quality. I tried one song using the standard
WMA setting. It synched at about 5MB. Sound quality was OK but seemed a
little tinny if you ask me. Has anybody done this math already and figured
out which of these settings is best to use? I want as many songs as I can get
on this thing (it's only 512MB) but I'm willing to give up *some* space for
quality. Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-05-2006, 04:15 PM
Galen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method

In news:BE14D9FA-C520-4F7A-9E0C-2A70EBC9A486@microsoft.com,
jpas1954 <jpas1954@discussions.microsoft.com> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> Like a lot of people, Santa brought me an MP3 player this year. When
> I go into Media Player and want to rip files, I notice not only that
> there are 4 choices (WMA, variable bit, lossless, MP3) but that each
> one has a slider allowing you to modify size vs. quality. I tried one
> song using the standard WMA setting. It synched at about 5MB. Sound
> quality was OK but seemed a little tinny if you ask me. Has anybody
> done this math already and figured out which of these settings is
> best to use? I want as many songs as I can get on this thing (it's
> only 512MB) but I'm willing to give up *some* space for quality.
> Thoughts?


At about 192 kbps you're at about the best the average human ear is able to
detect any nuances. Optionally, see if you can convert a switch and play
your music out of speakers instead of your ear buds or what have you? Do you
notice a difference? If so then consider upgrading to a fair quality (under
$100 should get you a decent pair) headphones. My experiences with ripping
from WMP is pretty limited and I tend to use a third party application for
ripping though I do all of my playback from within WMP. Then again I rip at
320 kbps here on to the drive and if I'm going to convert it for my media
player than I just go ahead and compress it down to 128 which is... "good
enough..." The "tinny" sound (which is a real musical term meaning thin in
tone) that you're getting is very likely not due to the quality of the rip
but rather to the quality of the equipment.

--
Galen - MS MVP - Windows (Shell/User & IE)
http://dts-l.org/

"We approached the case, you remember, with an absolutely blank mind,
which is always an advantage. We had formed no theories. We were simply
there to observe and to draw inferences from our observations." -
Sherlock Holmes


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-05-2006, 04:15 PM
Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method

On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 05:31:02 -0800, "jpas1954"
<jpas1954@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Like a lot of people, Santa brought me an MP3 player this year. When I go
>into Media Player and want to rip files, I notice not only that there are 4
>choices (WMA, variable bit, lossless, MP3) but that each one has a slider
>allowing you to modify size vs. quality. I tried one song using the standard
>WMA setting. It synched at about 5MB. Sound quality was OK but seemed a
>little tinny if you ask me. Has anybody done this math already and figured
>out which of these settings is best to use? I want as many songs as I can get
>on this thing (it's only 512MB) but I'm willing to give up *some* space for
>quality. Thoughts?


I'd use 64kbps for a 512MB player. But then I listen in noisy
environments (like my car, which is old and particularly noisy) and
the streets near us (which are full of old, noisy cars like mine).

I guess it depends how sensitive you are to the 'quality' given your
listening environment. I'd just use 64 or maybe 96kbps at a push -
what's right for you depends on how good you want it ot be vs how many
tracks you want to get in the MP3 player - it's a tradeoff.

Maybe headphones other than the cheap ones provided by the player
manufacturer would be a good investment (though good ones will easily
cost more than the player itself did !)

Cheers - Neil
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-05-2006, 04:16 PM
jpas1954
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method

Ah. Another variable, the headphones. Of course. So, taking all this into
consideration, I used WMA files set to 192k. I swapped in some better
headphones and that made all the difference. Well, most of it. Turns out the
device also has a nice equalizer so I'd say it sounds pretty good now.
Thanks.

"jpas1954" wrote:

> Like a lot of people, Santa brought me an MP3 player this year. When I go
> into Media Player and want to rip files, I notice not only that there are 4
> choices (WMA, variable bit, lossless, MP3) but that each one has a slider
> allowing you to modify size vs. quality. I tried one song using the standard
> WMA setting. It synched at about 5MB. Sound quality was OK but seemed a
> little tinny if you ask me. Has anybody done this math already and figured
> out which of these settings is best to use? I want as many songs as I can get
> on this thing (it's only 512MB) but I'm willing to give up *some* space for
> quality. Thoughts?

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Big Size Font appears in Printouts Mahendra raj, Coimbatore Outlook Express 1 01-05-2006 05:00 PM
Persistent incorrect default paper size Garam Chitti Internet Explorer 6 0 01-05-2006 04:35 PM
PLZ Help me have prombles with directX and Ddraw Files.. StEvEn_need-HELP Windows XP Games 1 01-05-2006 07:55 AM
RE: Remote control and color quality Daniel Gurney Windows XP Work Remotely 1 01-05-2006 07:12 AM
2 shortcut questions SeaMaid Windows XP Customize 11 01-05-2006 06:30 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 2.3.2 © 2005, Crawlability, Inc.

Optimal 'quality vs. size' rip method