Do Higher MP3 Bit Rates Pay Off?
May 17th, 2007 by Michael Kreidler
I just recorded an interview with Dr. Jim Coyle (aka iJim) and as I was playing with the file I saw the recording was made at a depth of 8 bits but a sample rate of 64Kbps. I can never remember to what these terms refer, but I know the net result is the recording isn’t terrible. Still, I like to understand the terms better than that, so I got onto Wikipedia and looked up the term ‘Bit Rate’. I will admit my brain was not firing on all cylinders, and so I was not absorbing much. I generally scanned the page to see if there were any pretty pictures. Alas, there were none.
I did come across a link that intrigued me. It was an article entitled Do Higher MP3 Bit Rates Pay Off? This is a question I have had myself. No, not with all the “fancy words” and “punctuation”, but I have been wondering about bit rates, file size, and audio quality.
[Back in the old days], most MP3s were encoded at constant bit rate (CBR) 128Kb/s, striking a balance between acceptable audio quality and file sizes that were small enough for easy trading over a dialup connection. But what was born out of necessity endures today, as most of the music available on rogue peer-to-peer networks is still compressed at this rate. It’s been called “near CD” quality, but we know better—it isn’t even in the same Zip code as CD audio. [More…]
Now, none of this has done anything to help me understand bit depth and bit rate, but it has been a great distraction so I don’t mind my ignorance as much.
Powered by ScribeFire.



