Full Version: How much of a difference is there between...
192kbps CBR, 192kbps VBR, and APS? I just noticed that the service I use (http://allofmp3.com) offers all three for the same price, and that before now I'd just been buying the former. I know that the latter two would be of better SQ, but it wouldn't be a LARGE difference, would it?
QUOTE(Ziddy @ Jul 16 2005, 01:46 AM)
192kbps CBR, 192kbps VBR, and APS? I just noticed that the service I use (http://allofmp3.com) offers all three for the same price, and that before now I'd just been buying the former. I know that the latter two would be of better SQ, but it wouldn't be a LARGE difference, would it?
From another thread basically discussing the same thing:
QUOTE(Defsac)
VBR is more efficient than CBR. Think of CBR as a container of size x. At a water factory, they produce 600mL (20oz) and 1.25L (40oz) bottles of water using this container. The problem is that when they put 600mL into the container it's half empty, and they can't sell 2L bottles of water because the container isn't large enough.
VBR is the equivalent of using containers of different sizes. When there's only 600mL of water a 600mL container is used, when there's 2L a 2L container is used. You're still producing around the same amount of water, but you're not wasting space that could be used more effectively elsewhere.
VBR is the equivalent of using containers of different sizes. When there's only 600mL of water a 600mL container is used, when there's 2L a 2L container is used. You're still producing around the same amount of water, but you're not wasting space that could be used more effectively elsewhere.
CBR only compares quality wise at 320kbps, but really on all but perhaps a handful of problem samples you're simply wasting space. Some iPods have a stuttering issue with VBR, and in this case it may be advisible to use 320kbps CBR.
I've ripped CDs in VBR and APS before, and I haven't really noticed any stuttering. I think the problem is mainly with the "new" ones with longer battery life.
I know how VBR works compared to CBR; my question is whether it's enough of a difference to be concerned about.
I know how VBR works compared to CBR; my question is whether it's enough of a difference to be concerned about.
QUOTE(Ziddy @ Jul 15 2005, 08:02 AM)
I know how VBR works compared to CBR; my question is whether it's enough of a difference to be concerned about.
I think the main problem here is that allofmp3 use stupid switches like -m s -k (= simple stereo mode, all lowpass filters disabled) in modes other than the presets, so I'd say the difference will be quite large. Why not make a test and encode a song you know well in 1)APS and 2) preset cbr 192 -m s -k and then try very hard to hear a difference in an ABX test. If you don't hear a difference, all the better, but I'd still advise you to use APS for future downloads.
QUOTE(Ziddy @ Jul 16 2005, 02:02 AM)
I know how VBR works compared to CBR; my question is whether it's enough of a difference to be concerned about.
That would depend on the source material, your hearing, the encoder, and the settings used for encoding. If what sTisTi posted is correct then I would say the difference would be significant.
I'm fairly sure that they use LAME. To be honest, though, I don't really hear too much of a difference between different bitrates. I could probably notice a difference if I did an ABX test or whatever, but I don't really think it's worth the trouble of rebuying songs...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.