iPod mp3 192kbps or AAC 128kbps?

well mine is AAC at 192kbps

Shacklebolt said:

I'm sure this has been argued and argued about many times, but I haven't been around for it, and I'd like to know now.

Anyone have a preference/notice a difference?

Click to expand...

192kbs is better than 128kbs. AAC results in a much smaller file size than MP3

Thus a 192kbs MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 192kbs AAC, the quality of both files will be the same.

swiftaw said:

192kbs is better than 128kbs. AAC results in a much smaller file size than MP3

Thus a 192kbs MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 192kbs AAC, the quality of both files will be the same.

Click to expand...

Oh my god, no! 192Kbps (Kilo bit per second) means the song takes 192 Kilobit or 24 Kilobyte per second, no matter what encryption is used. The point of AAC is that it has better quality than MP3 at the same bitrate, or alternatively that you can use AAC at a lower bitrate with the same quality as MP3 at a higher bitrate.

192Kbps MP3 is about the same quality as 128Kbps AAC at 50% larger size. 192Kbps AAC has much higher quality than 192Kbps MP3 at exactly the same size. So the correct answer is:

"Thus a 192Kbps MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 128Kbps AAC, the quality of both files will be about the same. MP3 plays on any player, AAC plays on your computer and on an iPod until more manufacturers pull their fingers out and implement AAC."

gnasher729 said:

Oh my god, no! 192Kbps (Kilo bit per second) means the song takes 192 Kilobit or 24 Kilobyte per second, no matter what encryption is used. The point of AAC is that it has better quality than MP3 at the same bitrate, or alternatively that you can use AAC at a lower bitrate with the same quality as MP3 at a higher bitrate.

192Kbps MP3 is about the same quality as 128Kbps AAC at 50% larger size. 192Kbps AAC has much higher quality than 192Kbps MP3 at exactly the same size. So the correct answer is:

"Thus a 192Kbps MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 128Kbps AAC, the quality of both files will be about the same. MP3 plays on any player, AAC plays on your computer and on an iPod until more manufacturers pull their fingers out and implement AAC."

Click to expand...

Oops, yeah, kind of got that backwards, I did know that, not sure why I got it the other way around. Kbps should really be a giveaway. I feel stupid now. Gonna blame it on the fact that it is 6:45am and I haven't yet been to bed.

I prefer mp3 192. It just sounds better to me is all. Nothing technical to speak of.

gnasher729 said:

Oh my god, no! 192Kbps (Kilo bit per second) means the song takes 192 Kilobit or 24 Kilobyte per second, no matter what encryption is used. The point of AAC is that it has better quality than MP3 at the same bitrate, or alternatively that you can use AAC at a lower bitrate with the same quality as MP3 at a higher bitrate.

192Kbps MP3 is about the same quality as 128Kbps AAC at 50% larger size. 192Kbps AAC has much higher quality than 192Kbps MP3 at exactly the same size. So the correct answer is:

"Thus a 192Kbps MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 128Kbps AAC, the quality of both files will be about the same. MP3 plays on any player, AAC plays on your computer and on an iPod until more manufacturers pull their fingers out and implement AAC."

Click to expand...

some humans say 256 kbps mp3 same with 128 kbps aac. This is not true? 128 kbps aac same with 192kbps mp3?

Anything over 128kbps with a modern codec (be it AAC or the latest MP3 iteration) are transparent for most people.

For the sake of your comparison, 192kbps MP3 is more compatible, especially with older devices (eg. car entertainment systems). 128kbps AAC will save you more space.

I would pick neither. No matter the codec, I would go with vbr instead of cbr. My codec of choice is usually Lame MP3 -V 2.

Rslnifyy said:

some humans say 256 kbps mp3 same with 128 kbps aac. This is not true? 128 kbps aac same with 192kbps mp3?

Click to expand...

Unlikely, as AAC's compression isn't that much better over MP3. That being said, it is bound to be different depending on the type of music, as to how big a difference there will be between the two formats.

Just take it for granted that AAC is always better than MP3 at the same bit rate. Personally I use 192 kbps AAC VBR, and couldn't be happier, although I am not an audiophile per se.

Rslnifyy said:

some humans say 256 kbps mp3 same with 128 kbps aac. This is not true? 128 kbps aac same with 192kbps mp3?

Click to expand...

The word is transparent, meaning most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps AAC and 192kbps MP3. Most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and the original in ABX listening tests.

T'hain Esh Kelch said:

Unlikely, as AAC's compression isn't that much better over MP3. That being said, it is bound to be different depending on the type of music, as to how big a difference there will be between the two formats.

Just take it for granted that AAC is always better than MP3 at the same bit rate. Personally I use 192 kbps AAC VBR, and couldn't be happier, although I am not an audiophile per se.

Click to expand...

Thanks for reply❤

Sorry if I'm bothering you but I found out that YouTube automatically encodes songs to 128kbps AAC (with 44,000hz I think) so I posted it here. If I convert 128kbps AAC to 256kbps mp3, will I waste time? If an aac mp3 with 44,000hz also has 44,000hz, will I have the same quality?

ian87w said:

The word is transparent, meaning most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps AAC and 192kbps MP3. Most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and the original in ABX listening tests.

Click to expand...

ian87w said:

The word is transparent, meaning most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps AAC and 192kbps MP3. Most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and the original in ABX listening tests.

Click to expand...

I'm confused so I don't fully understand, sorry

Rslnifyy said:

Sorry if I'm bothering you but I found out that YouTube automatically encodes songs to 128kbps AAC (with 44,000hz I think) so I posted it here. If I convert 128kbps AAC to 256kbps mp3, will I waste time? If an aac mp3 with 44,000hz also has 44,000hz, will I have the same quality?

Click to expand...

Transcoding a compressed audio to a higher bitrate is a waste of time. You won’t get higher quality from the source file.

ian87w said:

Transcoding a compressed audio to a higher bitrate is a waste of time. You won’t get higher quality from the source file.

Click to expand...

then isn't it best to convert it to 192kbps? because at the same quality aac is better than mp3 so 128Kbps 44,000hz aac 192kbps is equal to 48,000 isn't it true? so does the hz change?

Rslnifyy said:

then isn't it best to convert it to 192kbps? because at the same quality aac is better than mp3 so 128Kbps 44,000hz aac 192kbps is equal to 48,000 isn't it true? so does the hz change?

Click to expand...

No. Your source is 128kbos AAC. Just keep it that way. Transcoding it to higher bitrate, AAC or MP3, is a waste since your source is already compressed.

Thank you Bro❤

Rslnifyy said:

Sorry if I'm bothering you but I found out that YouTube automatically encodes songs to 128kbps AAC (with 44,000hz I think) so I posted it here. If I convert 128kbps AAC to 256kbps mp3, will I waste time? If an aac mp3 with 44,000hz also has 44,000hz, will I have the same quality?

Click to expand...

Complete waste of time. You are just ending up with a file more than twice as large, with worse audio quality.

ian87w said:

The word is transparent, meaning most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps AAC and 192kbps MP3. Most people cannot tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and the original in ABX listening tests.

Click to expand...

I doubt that.
Its more in line - most people are not USED to hear that difference. But I’d think most people have the abbility

Rslnifyy said:

Sorry if I'm bothering you but I found out that YouTube automatically encodes songs to 128kbps AAC (with 44,000hz I think) so I posted it here. If I convert 128kbps AAC to 256kbps mp3, will I waste time? If an aac mp3 with 44,000hz also has 44,000hz, will I have the same quality?

Click to expand...

yes you will

Shacklebolt said:

I'm sure this has been argued and argued about many times, but I haven't been around for it, and I'd like to know now.

Anyone have a preference/notice a difference?

(I mean in terms of sound quality)

Click to expand...

Honestly if you care about music, you should use none of the above - they are both garbage

swiftaw said:

192kbs is better than 128kbs. AAC results in a much smaller file size than MP3

Thus a 192kbs MP3 will be a larger file size that the same song at 192kbs AAC, the quality of both files will be the same.

Click to expand...

192kbps directly refers to the number of bits available, and file size will be identical. AAC provides more transparency and better quality at equal bitrates, so when people say AAC is smaller they mean you can gain the same quality from 128 as a 192 mp3. so AAC 192 will sound better than MP3 192, but at the same size. Or 128 AAC should sound roughly the same as 192 MP3, but at a smaller size.

also "the same" is subjective, as they use quite different compression mentalities. I personally will always prefer the sound of AAC over MP3 even at lower bitrates because it doesn't do aggressive high frequency rolloff like MP3 does, which makes quite the difference for the type of music I listen to (electronic).

although to be honest, both will sound bad. I would recommend 256 AAC, or 320 MP3, and nothing lower, as that's about where both formats achieve transparency in most listening environments. Personally I strive for lossless, just for those moments I am in a quiet room with my nice gear it really shines. Additionally, if you're using bluetooth, it will re-compress the stream to AAC or SBC (or APTx if you're not in the apple walled garden), and starting off with AAC will sound better recompressed to AAC (contrary to popular belief if still does re-compress the stream, even for AirPods, but staying with the same format has some merits), with SBC it probably won't make much of a difference.