What's The Best Music File Type For Low Size

[dmorgan89]

I have a friend who is limited on his hdd space, but he has a lot of mp3's. What can I convert these files to save space on his hard drive. Should i switch them to vma?

[Arm]

B) Ogg Vorbis.

[dmorgan89]

Thankyou. 2 more questions. Does it take more memory to play than mp3 and is there a good low resource player for them?

[Afronaut]

Originally posted by dmorgan89@15 July 2004 - 07:51
Thankyou. 2 more questions. Does it take more memory to play than mp3 and is there a good low resource player for them?
You running a calculator or PC?

I dont think Ogg or mp3's and the likes takes that much resources,
but if you'd share more info of what equipment you're about to use,
could be easier to get into this.

:cool2:

[dmorgan89]

probably more of a ti-83. this computer is running on a pentium 1 probably somewhere around 30 mb of ram. the capacity on the hdd is 1.98 gigs. 1.1 gigs of that is mp3.

[4play]

converting them to ogg vorbis is not gonna mean a dramatic decrease in file size. just leave them as mp3's. converting lots on a p1 will take forever as well.

ogg vorbis take more cpu power to decode. apprently the original ipod cant play them at all because of a lack of cpu power while new version can just about.

[Arm]

Ogg Vorbis have twice the quality of mp3s so you only have to encode the files at half the bitrate. So, in theory, the mp3s would become half the file size. :)

[Snee]

Originally posted by Arm@15 July 2004 - 19:48
Ogg Vorbis have twice the quality of mp3s so you only have to encode the files at half the bitrate. So, in theory, the mp3s would become half the file size. :)
Can you back these statements of yours up?

[4play]

I doubt he can since I have seen plenty of comparison charts and none suggest anywhere near twice the quality.

it is alot better codec then mp3 but its not gonna make much of a difference really.

[B.Helto]

recompression = bad idea. The sound is guaranteed to be worse the second time around.

Ogg is fine, but compress from the source (i.e.: CD). Otherwise it's best to leave the mp3 as it is.

[Arm]

Originally posted by SnnY@15 July 2004 - 14:27
Can you back these statements of yours up?
Try encoding a 128 bitrate mp3 to 64k and see if you notice any difference in sound. Or take a 196 mp3 and convery it to 128 .ogg.
Unless your some snotty audiophile who buys $5000 speakers and freezes your cds before you listen to them, the quality should be fine.

[Afronaut]

Originally posted by Arm+16 July 2004 - 02:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Arm @ 16 July 2004 - 02:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@15 July 2004 - 14:27
Can you back these statements of yours up?
Try encoding a 128 bitrate mp3 to 64k and see if you notice any difference in sound. Or take a 196 mp3 and convery it to 128 .ogg.
Unless your some snotty audiophile who buys &#036;5000 speakers and freezes your cds before you listen to them, the quality should be fine. [/b][/quote]
;)

Ever-so-lovely.

[B.Helto]

Originally posted by Arm@15 July 2004 - 19:13
Try encoding a 128 bitrate mp3 to 64k and see if you notice any difference in sound. Or take a 196 mp3 and convery it to 128 .ogg.
Unless your some snotty audiophile who buys &#036;5000 speakers and freezes your cds before you listen to them, the quality should be fine.
I did, and I did. ;)

I don&#39;t consider myself snotty - and my speakers cost a fraction of that amount - but I did notice a drop in sound quality.

The mp3 to mp3 was nearly unlistenable - the conversion to ogg was much better but still noticable (particulaly with acoustic guitar and cymbals).
Advising dmorgan89 to try ogg was a good call, but it is misleading to say there&#39;s no difference in quality.

I never even heard of freezing CDs before playing. That&#39;s just plain weird. :blink:

[masta.z]

Originally posted by Arm+15 July 2004 - 21:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Arm @ 15 July 2004 - 21:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@15 July 2004 - 14:27
Can you back these statements of yours up?
Try encoding a 128 bitrate mp3 to 64k and see if you notice any difference in sound. Or take a 196 mp3 and convery it to 128 .ogg.
Unless your some snotty audiophile who buys &#036;5000 speakers and freezes your cds before you listen to them, the quality should be fine. [/b][/quote]
64k mp3 vs 128k ogg... not hard to guess which will sound better considering the ogg file has double the bitrate of the mp3 :P if you&#39;re going to even attempt a comparison you normally should try using the same bitrates in each format :P

oh and i have a &#036;189 (CAD) stereo as my computer speakers and i can notice the difference between 320 & 192.... does this make me some snotty audiophile??

peace,
Mastia.z&#33; :music1:


also... can someone remind me what CD&#39;s are again? :huh: htink i heard of them once before :blink:

[Snee]

Originally posted by Arm+16 July 2004 - 02:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Arm @ 16 July 2004 - 02:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SnnY@15 July 2004 - 14:27
Can you back these statements of yours up?
Try encoding a 128 bitrate mp3 to 64k and see if you notice any difference in sound. Or take a 196 mp3 and convery it to 128 .ogg.
Unless your some snotty audiophile who buys &#036;5000 speakers and freezes your cds before you listen to them, the quality should be fine. [/b][/quote]
So in conclusion, you made it up.

[Ariel_001]

Originally posted by dmorgan89@15 July 2004 - 01:55
I have a friend who is limited on his hdd space, but he has a lot of mp3&#39;s. What can I convert these files to save space on his hard drive. Should i switch them to vma?
I say burn them to cd (As data)

Don`t transcode them...