Music copied to the PC
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 8,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Music copied to the PC
A couple of mates and me have been discussing music when it is copied to the PC. Like for instance using Windows Media player and u copy a cd to the HDD and u can choose the quality of the copy from 22MB per CD (44 kbps) to 86MB per CD (192 kbps) rite, and we could not work out what the kbps is on a CD for each song as i have got a couple of songs with 224 kbps that i have Downloaded. so what is the k bits/second on a CD.
and the other thing is what are the Super Audio CD (SACD) k Bits/Second??
link 1
Link 2
any ideas
Thanks
SC008Y_MAD
and the other thing is what are the Super Audio CD (SACD) k Bits/Second??
link 1
Link 2
any ideas
Thanks
SC008Y_MAD
#2
Probably better asking this in computer related but AFAIK therre is no Kbps for a CD as Kbps are related to the encoding format. MP3's and the like strip out sound that is north and south of certain hearing thresholds, thats why anything ripped under 192Kbps sounds crap.
There was a thread last week about SPARS codes AAA/AAD/ADD etc on CDs - Recording / Mixing / Mastering.
I guess that there will be some loss with any conversion between analogue and digital.
sue me if I am wrong though
There was a thread last week about SPARS codes AAA/AAD/ADD etc on CDs - Recording / Mixing / Mastering.
I guess that there will be some loss with any conversion between analogue and digital.
sue me if I am wrong though
#3
as I understand it 128 kps is CD quality sound, so I always download, sorry copy from my personally owned CD collection at least that quality.
96 kps is about tape quality as a rough guide. ANything less, don't bother with.
For most people 128 kps is enough, as the stuff they are listening to it on won't see any benefit from anything higher, and I don't think it sounds any different anyway - just means you get less tracks on your CD
96 kps is about tape quality as a rough guide. ANything less, don't bother with.
For most people 128 kps is enough, as the stuff they are listening to it on won't see any benefit from anything higher, and I don't think it sounds any different anyway - just means you get less tracks on your CD
#4
128kbps is definitely not CD quality sound
My understanding is this:
The data on a CD is in 16-bit words. Let's ignore oversampling. The data is retrieved at 44.1 kHz per channel (giving a theoretical maximum frequency of 22.05 kHz per channel, according to Nyquist's theorem). So you're sampling 32 bits (16 bits per channel) at 44.1 kHz which means 1408 kbps.
So for an 80 minute CD you're looking at (80x60x1.408)/8 = 844 MB, which isn't far off the 700 MB that a blank CD-R is formatted.
My understanding is this:
The data on a CD is in 16-bit words. Let's ignore oversampling. The data is retrieved at 44.1 kHz per channel (giving a theoretical maximum frequency of 22.05 kHz per channel, according to Nyquist's theorem). So you're sampling 32 bits (16 bits per channel) at 44.1 kHz which means 1408 kbps.
So for an 80 minute CD you're looking at (80x60x1.408)/8 = 844 MB, which isn't far off the 700 MB that a blank CD-R is formatted.
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Gloucestershire, home of the lawnmower.
Posts: 4,531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SACD is around 2.8 Mbps. But SACD can also do multi-channel, not just stereo.
Listen to the same album on CD and then on SACD, even on a low end system, and you can really hear the difference.
Cheers
Ian
Listen to the same album on CD and then on SACD, even on a low end system, and you can really hear the difference.
Cheers
Ian
#6
Sorry, maybe I misunderstood the first post - I was talking about mp3's on the PC giving CD quality audio CD's when you burn them.
For actual audio I can see how you are correct. I'll read the topic better next time, I promise
For actual audio I can see how you are correct. I'll read the topic better next time, I promise
#7
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Bear in mind Mp3 is compressed so lower bitrates are possible when compared to "raw" uncompressed music direct from a CD
So, 256Kbps is as close as you'll get. But 192Kbps is probably as low as you can go without tellling any difference
Obviously the quality also depends on how good the "ripping" software's encoding is
So, 256Kbps is as close as you'll get. But 192Kbps is probably as low as you can go without tellling any difference
Obviously the quality also depends on how good the "ripping" software's encoding is
Trending Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JonMc
Subaru Parts
22
06 February 2016 09:50 PM
RonaldoH
ScoobyNet General
2
21 December 2000 09:20 PM