How do you save your music files?

[dpwrite]

How do you save your music files? I just got a 12" Rev. B with Superdrive and AE (and extra 512MB of RAM from Crucial arrives tomorrow). Love the machine, by the way.

I started ripping all my CD's to the 80gig HD, and I noticed Panther was doing it to the AAC format, unlike my old Tibook with MP3's running OS 10.1. So I got on the Apple site and learned all about AAC. My question: how many kbps do you choose in saving music files? The Panther default is 128, which is near CD-quality sound and probably more than enough. I used to use my old Tibook as my stereo with a high-quality pair of Harmen-Karden speakers and subwoofer, so I used to save files at 192 kbps because I swore I could hear the difference between 192 and 128.

Do you think the difference in sound quality (if there is one now?)justifies the roughly 35% bigger file size between 128 and 192, particularly in the new AAC format? Thanks.

 

[virividox]

i still rip at 192 aac, although i am noticing space is getting a little tight, but its about the same as a 192 mp3 a little bigger. hehe but i dnt wanna get the best quality i can, without having too big a file size, its still manageable at 192

 

[SilentPanda]

Honestly I don't know that it makes a difference what *we* think. Rip the same song in several formats and compare them with your ears. I rip mine at 128 AAC just because. I've never been too terribly picky. Most of my music listening is in my Jeep Wrangler (read: tent on wheels) so quality isn't of primo importance to me.

 

[JackRipper]

Maxed out!

I take it as far as you can, 320 !!! If I had the space I would use AIFF, but AAC has been good to my ears.

 

[rueyeet]

I'd ripped at 192 MP3 as the lowest bitrate that I couldn't easily tell the difference, but the 128 AAC of the iTMS isn't bothering me, so I may re-rip everything to AAC if I do end up getting that miniPod.

I'll second the idea of ripping a couple at different rates and comparing them; the songs you use will make a difference. For me, that's some of the more complicated Nine Inch Nails tracks, because they've got lots of little itty bitty noises layered in, and I'm familiar with them to the degree that I noticed when they were missing or distorted in the lower-quality MP3's.

On this, your mileage will almost certainly vary.

 

[Pseudonym]

I have found aac to be a better quality compression than mp3. I've been very happy at 128 aac.

 

[RubberChicken]

I've tried several blind tests and I think most people would be struggling to pick the difference between 128 and 192 AAC or even aiff.

However, I have been using MP3 with VBR (variable bit rate) on high quality with a 128 lower limit. VBR alters the rate depending on the complexity of the music at a particular point. This gives you better compression and better quality. Most MP3 players should cope. I don't know any player other than the iPod that will play AAC. I want to use the music on custom burnt CDs in the car as well as on my iPod.

Lesson, have a think about how you want to use it.

 

[James_C]

I have have ripped all my CD's at 192 AAC. Like other users have said, compare the results at different bit rates and then make your decision. I could not notice much difference between 128 and 192, hard disk space is not an issue to me so I went with 192.

 

[hulugu]

HD Space = Cheap

I've been importing songs using AAC at 250 only because my iPod and TiBook hold more than enough for that quality, I have around 1300 songs, including 100+ from iTMS.
Originally I encoded using Mp3 but then I compared the same song using 128 Mp3 and 128 AAC and I noticed a difference, so I started using AAC. However, I would have avoided this if I didn't have an iPod.

 

[slowtreme]

Re: HD Space = Cheap

HD space isn't cheap when you have a notebook, and drives dont come in 200GB versions (2.5"). Being that you own a tibook that should make perfect sence.

Another thing entirely when you have a dektop system that can hold 3 or 4 harddisks.

 

[MoparShaha]

I ripped a song in pure AIFF, 128kbps MP3 and AAC, and lastly 160kbps MP3 and AAC. I honestly couldn't tell a difference, although I know there is one. Just shows though, for your average joe, it really doesn't matter.

After AAC came out, I started using it, but have now gone back to MP3@160kbps. As much as we'd all like to say AAC is a standard, it's still not as "standard" as the MP3 format. Everything under the sun reads MP3's, but not necessarily AAC. If I want to buy an el-cheapo MP3 player, I'd be stuck if all my music was AAC. I also briefly had a Palm Tungsten T, which would only deal with MP3. I just like to keep my options open.

 

[yamadataro]

Yeah, I think it all comes down to our personal preferences/criteria.

I used to rip at 192bps AAC, but my iPod was filling up quickly, so I've settled with 160bps AAC.