dansouth Posted January 29, 2001 Share Posted January 29, 2001 I am preparing to encode some mixes in MP3 format for web distribution. What resolution should I use? I would like to strike a balance between file size and fidelity, i.e. I don't want it to sound like crap and I don't want it to take forever to download. All suggestions appreciated, even the rude ones. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 First, stereo and mono files encoded at the same rate take up the same file size. But the mono versions are higher fidelity. Second, most people use 96K or (more commonly) 128K. For things like previews that aren't really intended for critical listening, 48K or 64K does the job. Avoid using variable bit rate encoding. Some players can't handle it. Frankly WMA is better than MP3 (but nobody wants to hear about that!). Other comments? Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Dan, Your average Napster user uses 128K. Some go to 192. Any higher than that and the file starts getting pretty big, although I have friends who regularly encode at 256K or even 320. Usually those aren't for general downloads files though; they're for some special purpose like comparing notes on a project or just storing some of your CD's on your hard drive. I rarely see any MP3's under 128K though. --Lee This message has been edited by Lee Flier on 01-30-2001 at 01:04 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 Actually, there's an article I wrote for the site that will probably answer most, if not all, of your questions. Go to Lessons for "MP3Audio: The Truth about File Encoding." It also has many examples you can download to hear what something sounds like, and you'll also notice that different encoders give different sounds. Here's the URL: http://www.musicplayer.com/CDA/Player/Main/1,2228,Lessons--5100871,00.html Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2001 Share Posted January 30, 2001 LOL- wish I'd seen this link a couple of days ago! Could have saved many hours of converting and testing. Interestingly, Craig's article kicks off with the basically same conclusion I finally came to, could have just heard it straight from the horse's mouth. One extra point, learned the hard way- Craig writes that mono mp3 format will generally sound better than stereo, BUT-- if the original mix doesn't work well in mono, a stereo mp3 file uploaded to mp3.com will most likely sound terrible in their lo-fi format, which is made from your converted file, not your original, adding insult to injury. If there is a disturbing difference in the two qualities on an mp3.com site, it is probably your (in my case, my) own fault. This falls under "No Shit, Sherlock" for old hands, but not everyone is an old hand. http://www.mp3.com/Kosmolith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.