Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Does anyone use cbr 224? (Read 4383 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

I have been wondering this for a while and I figured I would ask. How come no one uses this setting?

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #1 –
128 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2
192 = 3 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2
224 = 7 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2
256 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2

People like bitrates based on powers of 2. Why? No idea, I'm just guessing.

EDIT: Duh, I can't factor late at night. My hypothesis is moot.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #2 –
I use it to encode MP3s for my son, simply because his DVD/MP3 player will only play up to 224 kbps.

It sounds fine - but I use 192 CBR myself because I can squeeze more files onto a CD and it's one notch better than 160 CBR which sounds fine to me anyway!

Oh, his ears are 26 years old whereas my ears are 53 years old, which seems to justify a higher bit rate for him!

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #3 –
it doesn't have anything to do with that really, at least I think.  what I suspect it is is that people see bitrates as quality steps, which they are really, and with most things that have quality steps, people generally jump steps if the step prior to the one your on isn't a real noticeable difference.  so thus, they go up another step because then when they look back 2 steps they notice a difference. most people I have found view it kinda like this...

128Kbps = good quality
192Kbps = excellent quality
256Kbps = cd quality

and remember, this is the general publics view on things, not people from our community here which is more educated about these things.  But even with a lot of us, it kinda apply's the same.

People make these jumps from 128 to 192 because the difference between 128 and 160 isn't all that obvious.  but the difference between 128 and 192 IS obvious.  So, starting with what the world has come to believe is the starting point of good quality mp3's (128Kbps), the next big jump up in quality is 192Kbps, and from that the next jump up is 256Kbps, which is the bitrate that has been spread around as being CD quality.

Working with this idea... the reason that 160Kbps mp3s have become popular is because it gives a compromise in size and quality between 128Kbps and 192Kbps.  You want a better quality then 128kbps but don't like the filesizes of 192Kbps, so you choose 160.  224Kbps doesn't really work like this in the public's eye. Once your up over 200Kbps your obviously caring more about quality than size, so the jump to 256 (the supposed cd quality bitrate) isn't such a big deal, and the bonus of it is even if you can't hear the difference between 224 and 256 you still feel like "hey, I got the CD, but smaller!".  Doing 224 when what you are now caring about is quality seems more like of a let down than a good compromise.  at least to most people, that is.

did I explain that ok? 

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #4 –
Quote
did i explain that ok?


A very simple and plausible explanation.  Well done!

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #5 –
thanks

p.s just edited it.  think its a bit better now. [edit] and again

p.p.s. calx.  like the avatar.  radiohead rulz!
 

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #6 –
I sometimes use 224, but ABR, not CBR.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #7 –
224 is the bitrate used for mp2. it gives good quality that way. I see no reason using it with mp3s - if I go that high, I'd rather use mpc.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #8 –
@Drover's Dog:
Why do you use CBR? Instead of --alt-preset cbr 192, why not --alt-preset 192?

Just wondering...

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #9 –
Yep - I DJ at a pub and they run a ridiculous piece of software for playing music when I'm not there (the name escapes me).  It'll only play CBR mp3's, and guess what?  The maximum it'll go up to is 224kbps.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #10 –
It's interesting this was brought up.  I've just been thinking how 192Kb might be too much of a compromise to be really good.  It's too big to be a real space saver, but not big enough to give consistently transparent results.  I think if I were to use CBR, I go with 160 or 224 depending on the circumstance.

That being said, I think SNYder is pretty much right on with regard to general public opinion.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #11 –
I used CBR 192 for a good long while because it was the highest my MpTrip discman could handle. Now that I've moved on to a proper discman, the RioVolt SP250, I just use --alt-preset standard.

To me, 192 has always been transparent, with the only exception being some live music such as Rammstein - Live Aus Berlin.

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #12 –
Quote
@Drover's Dog:
Why do you use CBR? Instead of --alt-preset cbr 192, why not --alt-preset 192?

Just wondering...

I only use CBR because my Sony CD Walkman D-CJ01 doesn't play VBR too well.  My son also has a DVD/MP3 player that will only play up to 224 kbps.  CBR 192 is the compromise I've settled for for maximum hardware compatibility, quality and size.

Other than that, I would opt for --alt-preset standard using LAME 3.90.2.

Regards
DrD

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #13 –
Quote
@Drover's Dog:
Why do you use CBR? Instead of --alt-preset cbr 192, why not --alt-preset 192?

Just wondering...

Aren't "--alt-preset cb2 192" and "--alt-preset 192" exactly the same? Or am I confusing this with the newest LAME compiles in which I am quite sure they're the same.

abhatia

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #14 –
@Drover's Dog:
So use your monetary vote to get a new player than *does* support VBR.  iRiver makes really nice CD-MP3 players.  (And OGG support coming soon, woot!)

@abhatia:
--alt-preset 192 invokes ABR, not CBR

Does anyone use cbr 224?

Reply #15 –
Quote
@Drover's Dog:
So use your monetary vote to get a new player than *does* support VBR.  iRiver makes really nice CD-MP3 players.  (And OGG support coming soon, woot!)

@abhatia:
--alt-preset 192 invokes ABR, not CBR

I'd prefer to use the power of the internet to share my disappointment with prospective buyers.

This is cheaper than buying a new MP3 Discman!  The one I've got is good enough to use for the time being.  My 53-old ears probably can't tell the difference between CBR 192 and --aps anyway!