Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
May be an obvious answer, but can one assume that the file size of identical mp3 song files is an indication of the quality of the song file?
Have spent time over the past few months of ripping hundreds of song titles from old LPs and cassette tapes using an ION turntable and audacity software into mp3 files. Many of these are duplicate songs that may have been on both LP and cassettes as well as previously ripped CDs and perhaps a handful of songs from file sharing sites. Believe that in general I have ripped all of these at a bit rate of 256 Kbps.
However, when I compare many of the duplicate songs, while the song length may be identical the file size may differ from a few percent to upwards of 50% or more. Without dialing too deeply into the file properties, can I safely assume that the larger file size will contain a better fidelity characteristic and simply delete the smaller file?
I do tend to notice a difference between a song ripped from the various media and am under the impression that (in general) a song ripped at the same bit rate, from a CD sounds a little better (or different?) than an LP which is better than one ripped from a cassette.
May be an obvious answer, but can one assume that the file size of identical mp3 song files is an indication of the quality of the song file?
Have spent time over the past few months of ripping hundreds of song titles from old LPs and cassette tapes using an ION turntable and audacity software into mp3 files. Many of these are duplicate songs that may have been on both LP and cassettes as well as previously ripped CDs and perhaps a handful of songs from file sharing sites. Believe that in general I have ripped all of these at a bit rate of 256 Kbps.
However, when I compare many of the duplicate songs, while the song length may be identical the file size may differ from a few percent to upwards of 50% or more. Without dialing too deeply into the file properties, can I safely assume that the larger file size will contain a better fidelity characteristic and simply delete the smaller file?
I do tend to notice a difference between a song ripped from the various media and am under the impression that (in general) a song ripped at the same bit rate, from a CD sounds a little better (or different?) than an LP which is better than one ripped from a cassette.
I'm interested in responses to your first question.
As for CD-LP-cassette, a lot of issues come into play. A CD player does what it does, and the quality of the output basically never changes until it dies. Turntables and cassette decks require maintenance and parts to maintain their original sound quality. Their software also deteriorates over time. A fairly entry level CD player does a pretty good job vs a much higher end unit. The same can't be said for turntables and cassette decks. The original sound quality of the recording, from both the artist's and studio's perspective can make a big difference. Plus it's much easier today to get a great recording, but it isn't always done.
I do agree with your assessment of relative sound quality. That being said I have heard numerous turntable setups that sound "better" than a basic (especially early vintage) CD player. But that's not a common occurence.
Bitrate is the best measure of a song's fidelity. In general, higher bitrate files are bigger.
If the compression algorithm for one file is less efficient than the other of equal bitrate, it would produce a bigger file, even though the bitrate was the same. It's probably not enough of a difference to worry about, in that respect.
IMO a bigger worry should be whether a larger file, claiming to be the same bandwidth as another file, has a virus payload attached. Run a virus scanner if you're dealing with audio files from sources that may not be concerned about security.
I am not aware of viruses that are embedded in compressed audio files.
In general, for two recordings of the same song, with the same type (MP3 for example) the larger file probably has a higher bit rate and will have higher fidelity.
However, when I compare many of the duplicate songs, while the song length may be identical the file size may differ from a few percent to upwards of 50% or more.
Songs using the same bitrate and length should have comparable file sizes, you might have differences based on the encoder and other factors but 50% is a lot. One explanation might be that you used constant bitrate on the larger files and a variable bitrate on the smaller files but I would be surprised if it were that much of a difference.
Truthfully if you're looking for the best quality you should of researched more and used something like FLAC or other lossless codec.
I'm interested in responses to your first question.
Generally speaking yes as long as you're comparing the same codec and there isn't any ID:10t errors. I'll use these video screen shots as an example, the same principals apply for video and audio encoding. This is high bitrate video @8000kbps encoded from DV and therefore has a large file size:
Here's same video at @3000kbps encoded from DV which is going to be roughly a little less than 1/3 the file size:
Here's where the ID:10t error comes in, this is also 3000kbps which is going to be the same file size as the one above but it was encoded from DV>8000kbps>3000kbps . There is only a single extra step in the middle but it has a huge effect on the quality:
As has been said GENERALLY speaking, larger file = better quality.
HOWEVER, recording a file from the LINE-IN on your PC from a turntable or cassette deck will absolutely create a larger file then ripping a high quality MP3 via a program meant to do so.
Every time.
One track "recorded" to MP3 though a line-in at the highest bit rate will always be larger then the same track correctly ripped from a CD.
If you are concerned about fidelity stick to lossless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll use these video screen shots as an example, the same principals apply for video and audio encoding. This is high bitrate video @8000kbps encoded from DV and therefore has a large file size:
