vbr vs 64kb

which is better?

64kb
0
No votes
vbr
3
75%
same
1
25%
 
Total votes : 4

vbr vs 64kb

Postby chadwill » Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:07 pm

Archive gives the choice of downloading in 64kb_mps or vbr_mps there is a major difference in size of these files. I have not downloaded both to see the difference in quality. Does any one know if there is a difference?
chadwill
Wall of Sound
Wall of Sound
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:43 pm

Postby nicolasalk » Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:35 am

VBR of course, but is heavier

64k is very bad IMO
nicolasalk
Jerry
Jerry
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: Chile

Postby nicolasalk » Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:36 am

use FLAC/SHN
nicolasalk
Jerry
Jerry
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: Chile

Postby FretfulDave » Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:40 am

I'll try to go through this succinctly...


There are a number of formats offered on archive. Two formats are what are referred to as "lossless" formats and the MP3s are "lossy" or formats that contain data loss.

All files that are compressed are decompressed as they are played back through your music player.

The files put up on archive.org are compressed from their original format. Two of the format types are "lossless" meaning that they are compressed to reduce the file size but the compression algorithm does not remove information from the original recording. When it is played back and decompressed, all information is restored and you listened to a duplicate of the original recording. These formats are SHN (Shorten) and FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Compression).

The other format is MP3, which as I have noted is a "lossy" format. What this really means is that when the original file is compressed, information (the bits) are thrown away to help get more compression and an even shorter file compared to what a lossless compression algorithm can produce. When you play back an MP3, the file is decompressed but you are not hearing all the information that was in the original recording, so it is either "interpreted" back into the data stream or in the case of silence, just replaced with timed silence, if you will.

So continuing the blather, the MP3 compression algorithm has numerous compression degrees that can be selected before the original file is compressed and this information is written into the MP3 file header so as to let the playback program, with the decompression algorithm, know how to appropriately decompress the information. The MP3 algorithm can compress at rates of 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 80, 96, 112, 128, 160, 192, 224, 256, and 320 and also a mode called VBR. And guess what the lower the number the smaller the file and the more information that is thrown away from the original recording. I.e., it is a lower quality reproduction. OK, keep reading... don't fall asleep yet, the answer you were looking for is...

VBR stands for Variable Bit Rate compression. so VBR uses intelligence in the algorithm to do things like detect silence and compress that at 32 but when there is a full fabric of sound, only compress at 320 to produce the best possible compressed and lossy sound reproduction..

So, without a doubt VBR is FAR, FAR better than 64.

To my ear, 128 is about the lowest I will accept for MP3s. When I produce MP3s of my various jams that I record, that is what I compress at. I cannot tell much difference between VBR and 128, though one friend of mine say he can and strives to get only VBR MP3s.

For those of us older deadheads, 64 sounds kinda like 3rd, 4th or more, generation tapes to me. Another way to express it is 64 sounds a bit like listening to a recording over the old phone system (not cell phones. horrible audio). 32 sounds like talking through tin cans and string (or a cell phone...).

I never load anything but the FLACs or SHNs myself. Then I will produce my own MP3s, if I so desire and that allows ME to choose what level of lossy compression I will apply. I usually restore the FLACs or SHNs to audio CDs, which then are perfect replicas of the original recording. If you restore MP3s to CD audio format, you definitely produce a degraded result.

Granted to 99% of everybody, you will have a hard time telling a 128 stream or a VBR stream from an uncompressed recording. But for me, I believe I can detect a difference. Besides, there is the principle of the thing. I.e., retaining the music as it was originally recorded.

I know a lot of this information is already in various topics on the board, so apologies for consuming additional (and I hope compressed) bit space on the server.

Dave
The river keeps a talkin'
FretfulDave
Rosemary
Rosemary
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:40 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley, Pa

Postby nicolasalk » Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:03 am

FretfulDave wrote:I'll try to go through this succinctly...


There are a number of formats offered on archive. Two formats are what are referred to as "lossless" formats and the MP3s are "lossy" or formats that contain data loss.

All files that are compressed are decompressed as they are played back through your music player.

The files put up on archive.org are compressed from their original format. Two of the format types are "lossless" meaning that they are compressed to reduce the file size but the compression algorithm does not remove information from the original recording. When it is played back and decompressed, all information is restored and you listened to a duplicate of the original recording. These formats are SHN (Shorten) and FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Compression).

The other format is MP3, which as I have noted is a "lossy" format. What this really means is that when the original file is compressed, information (the bits) are thrown away to help get more compression and an even shorter file compared to what a lossless compression algorithm can produce. When you play back an MP3, the file is decompressed but you are not hearing all the information that was in the original recording, so it is either "interpreted" back into the data stream or in the case of silence, just replaced with timed silence, if you will.

So continuing the blather, the MP3 compression algorithm has numerous compression degrees that can be selected before the original file is compressed and this information is written into the MP3 file header so as to let the playback program, with the decompression algorithm, know how to appropriately decompress the information. The MP3 algorithm can compress at rates of 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 80, 96, 112, 128, 160, 192, 224, 256, and 320 and also a mode called VBR. And guess what the lower the number the smaller the file and the more information that is thrown away from the original recording. I.e., it is a lower quality reproduction. OK, keep reading... don't fall asleep yet, the answer you were looking for is...

VBR stands for Variable Bit Rate compression. so VBR uses intelligence in the algorithm to do things like detect silence and compress that at 32 but when there is a full fabric of sound, only compress at 320 to produce the best possible compressed and lossy sound reproduction..

So, without a doubt VBR is FAR, FAR better than 64.

To my ear, 128 is about the lowest I will accept for MP3s. When I produce MP3s of my various jams that I record, that is what I compress at. I cannot tell much difference between VBR and 128, though one friend of mine say he can and strives to get only VBR MP3s.

For those of us older deadheads, 64 sounds kinda like 3rd, 4th or more, generation tapes to me. Another way to express it is 64 sounds a bit like listening to a recording over the old phone system (not cell phones. horrible audio). 32 sounds like talking through tin cans and string (or a cell phone...).

I never load anything but the FLACs or SHNs myself. Then I will produce my own MP3s, if I so desire and that allows ME to choose what level of lossy compression I will apply. I usually restore the FLACs or SHNs to audio CDs, which then are perfect replicas of the original recording. If you restore MP3s to CD audio format, you definitely produce a degraded result.

Granted to 99% of everybody, you will have a hard time telling a 128 stream or a VBR stream from an uncompressed recording. But for me, I believe I can detect a difference. Besides, there is the principle of the thing. I.e., retaining the music as it was originally recorded.

I know a lot of this information is already in various topics on the board, so apologies for consuming additional (and I hope compressed) bit space on the server.

Dave


i wish all people could think like you and me

i hate people who says mp3 sound better than cds, i try to explain the whole thing, but damn, i hate them
nicolasalk
Jerry
Jerry
 
Posts: 469
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:20 pm
Location: Chile

Postby Hajimemashite!!! » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:50 pm

VBRs are far better. and yes FLAC and SHN files sound better, but some people dont have enough room for each show they download to take up 1+ gigabytes.

VBR sounds nearly as good at like 1/5 the space.
its just easier.
Image
Hajimemashite!!!
Pigpen
Pigpen
 
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:08 pm

Postby gr8fulbluz » Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:49 pm

I know this doesn't apply to the Archive but I avoid VBR anything. It is just me and my thing. To me VBR MP3s muddy out the sound and really kill off any ambiance removing "background" sounds that aren't as loud as other sounds making the mids sound flat.
For my use, I get the lossless shns, flacs and make my own mixed MP3 cds for use in the car. My car stereo does well with mp3 cds. I encode at a constant bit rate 192kbps min.
! your results may vary !

Cheers
User avatar
gr8fulbluz
Senior Member
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Wash DC


Return to Tapers Section

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest