Should I go with CBR or VBR(0) for my mp3's? Options

[DaGrandMastah]

Hi all, new to the forums. I had asked this question elsewhere and was told this is the best place to ask.

I'm currently in the process of re-converting my cd library into mp3's on my computer. Ultimately I'd like to get the best (lossy) sound quality I can get...and was originally planning to go with 320 CBR but I'm now reading a lot about VBR v-0 and how it's basically equivalent with an impossible to notice difference between the 2. I'm not concerned about space on my computer hard drive but I do plan on loading up these mp3's to my iPhone (where space can get scarce). I just converted 2 FLAC files and noticed a 1.5 mb difference between the 2, but as far as I can tell, no real degradation in sound quality.

Id just like to get some thoughts on this. I'm certainly no expert on the subject of sound science. To be honest, I'm not an audiophile at all...but at the same time, I want to "future proof" myself so that I never do realize (like I did this time around) that I'd like to upgrade my library (upgraded my headphones and started noticing a difference in quality of some mp3's).

Is there any reason why I may regret going with vbr v-0 over cbr or will I thank myself for saving the space? I figure that if some of the professionals on here cannot notice a difference then there is no chance I ever will.

Also, if there are any mac users here, could you please give me your opinion on the best settings for converting FLAC/CD's in XLD? Are the below settings good?

http://i50.tinypic.com/2z9e7u9.jpg

This post has been edited by db1989: May 3 2012, 07:36

Reason for edit: TOS #6: not an MP3 tech issue / TOS #5: post completely different topics to their own threads

[rhfrjpfdh]

hello to all
i'm interested in the question (lame 3.99.5): in frames which mp3 file keep more audio information ( -V 0 -b 320 --lowpass 20.5 ) or ( -q 0 -b 320 [default --lowpass 20.5] )?

[Kohlrabi]

i'm interested in the question (lame 3.99.5): in frames which mp3 file keep more audio information ( -V 0 -b 320 --lowpass 20.5 ) or ( -q 0 -b 320 [default --lowpass 20.5] )?

If you want to keep as much information as possible you should use lossless compression. Lossy compression is used to produce audibly transparent files (i.e. without artifacts) at small filesizes. Using overkill compression options does little to nothing to diminish the likelihood of artifacts on problem samples.

[halb27]

Using overkill compression options does little to nothing to diminish the likelihood of artifacts on problem samples.

This is not true. Try for instance lead-voice and eig with my variant 3.99.5y -V0+.

[Dynamic]

Using overkill compression options does little to nothing to diminish the likelihood of artifacts on problem samples.

This is not true. Try for instance lead-voice and eig with my variant 3.99.5y -V0+.

Might it be fairer to state that this is not universally true, but that where the psychoacoustic model has failed at around -V3 or -V2 and we use higher quality options, most of the extra bitrate is spread evenly over the whole sample, so very few of the extra bits will be applied to the features that require more bits to become transparent. If the psymodel was aware of where they were needed, it wouldn't have failed to achieve transparency in the first place and would have provided the extra bits in just the right places.

It's my impression that the lead-voice and eig examples are exceptions, but many other problem samples where there's a defect in MP3's designed capabilities or the psymodel is wrong get only slightly and gradually better as higher quality settings are applied.