reduce size of mp3 files

[kozikowski]

I mean the software package you posted. There don't seem to be any instructions. Where did you find the information?

Koz

[shinnen]

Hi Koz,
I did a google search for MP3 size reducing software, and the site http://mailsonline.net/archives/file/MP ... 452950.htm came up as one of the choices. When you run the executable, you'll see three entrees under 'Help' ..... 'Get Started' 'MP3 information' and 'Additional help'. Are these what you mean by 'instructions'?
..... john

[steve]

As far as I'm aware, the only way to change the compression quality of an MP3 is to decode and re-encode it, which I presume your software does automatically. The problem is that there is sound quality loss each time the data is encoded. So for example, if you encode at 128 kbps, some information is lost, then re-encode at 180 kbps and some more information is lost. The resulting 180 kbps file is lower sound quality than the 128 kbps file. If you re-encode to, say 98 kbps, then even more information is lost.

The better way is to encode from the original (uncompressed) audio - which in your case is the CD. Ripping the CDs again and encoding directly to the desired MP3 format will take more time than batch processing your MP3s, but you will get better results.

For future reference, we recommend that people keep an uncompressed (WAV, AIFF or FLAC) copy of their original files, then if you want to re-encode your MP3s you can batch process directly from the (perfect) WAV/AIFF/Flac files.

[kozikowski]

I understand. I won't be doing that because I'm on a Mac. Do one song and see how it goes. The additional sound damage may be acceptable. The elves will add that to the list of software pages that we know works. Batch software is always welcome, even if it does plain jobs.

Koz

[shinnen]

It seems like the way this program (Mp3QualityModifier) reduces file size is by reducing the bitrate. So...... I guess the question is .... what is an accptable bitrate for most listeners? (The programs default is 130.) Some of the MP3s that I want to reduce in size are as large as 320.
Thanks,
..... john

[waxcylinder]

When I bough my first iPod I did some extensive listening tests (on speakers and good Sennheiser over-ear studio headphones). Even with my aging ears I could easily detect the 128-192 difference, I could just about hear the 192-256 difference - but I could not detect 256-320-WAV difference.

At the time I only had a 30 gB iPod so I settled on 192 as a suitable compromise between music quality and disc space occupancy. Now that I have a 160 gB iPod I wish I hadn't - I now use 256 VBR (AAC not Mp3) for all current transcriptions and captures. For most people, for music, 256 is perceived as very good quality.

But on my old 30-gig iPod, which is used as a spoken-word library, I use 128 (Exceppt for Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - which I ripped in at 256). Some folk regard 64 as acceptable compression for spoken word.

My son, who is a purist, does all his in 320 - but note that his 160-gig iPod is over-full. My ex-boss started off with Apple-lossless and wondered why his iPod filled up so quickly and with so little music

WC

[shinnen]

Hi Koz,
I think I'll try 192. My wife is not that critical wrt to quality (it's her player I'm working on), so I think that that will give an acceptable level, and allow me to gain back some space.
Thanks again,
..... john