Conversion question

[TyWahn]

I am sure it has been covered .. so don't bit my head off .. BUT
I was wondering if someone could expplain if there is a significant difference between encoding AAC at a sampling rate 44.1 vs 48 KHZ .. AND what it means...
I have been struggling to finsd a good medium for sound quality ..
Originally I encoded everything at 192 mp3 ...
I have since been doing it all over at 160 AAC ... (from the CDs) but I ave not been really happy with the result .. so I may boost it up to 192 AAC .. but like I said, i was really wondering about the sampling rate, and if it had any inpact on final size.
AND if anyone has found a sweet spot for encoding ..

Thanks .. you all are such a great help!!!

 

[absolut_mac]

If it's sound quality that's important to you....

I am sure it has been covered .. so don't bit my head off .. BUT
I was wondering if someone could expplain if there is a significant difference between encoding AAC at a sampling rate 44.1 vs 48 KHZ .. AND what it means...
I have been struggling to finsd a good medium for sound quality ..
Originally I encoded everything at 192 mp3 ...
I have since been doing it all over at 160 AAC ... (from the CDs) but I ave not been really happy with the result .. so I may boost it up to 192 AAC .. but like I said, i was really wondering about the sampling rate, and if it had any inpact on final size.
AND if anyone has found a sweet spot for encoding ..

Thanks .. you all are such a great help!!!

Forget both 44.1Khz and 48Khz. If it's excellent sound quality that you're after, then go for 96Khz. It will give you both the widest dynamic range and the most realistic tonal qualities too.

Here's a site where you can easily compare the differences in sound quality and hear for yourself.

http://www.kusc.org/streams.shtml

 

[HiRez]

I was wondering if someone could expplain if there is a significant difference between encoding AAC at a sampling rate 44.1 vs 48 KHZ .. AND what it means...
I have been struggling to finsd a good medium for sound quality ..
Originally I encoded everything at 192 mp3 ...
I have since been doing it all over at 160 AAC ... (from the CDs) but I ave not been really happy with the result .. so I may boost it up to 192 AAC .. but like I said, i was really wondering about the sampling rate, and if it had any inpact on final size.
AND if anyone has found a sweet spot for encoding ..

It just means you're sampling the sound wave 48,000 times per second instead of 44,100, and so yes, the 48k file will be slightly larger. However, all standard CDs are sampled at 44.1k (with 16-bit resolution), and so to maintain maximum compatibility with most audio apps I recommend sampling at 44.1k. That's only 9% more samples and so no, I wouldn't say it's very significant as far as quality goes. 48k sampling is used by some high-end recorders, such as DAT tape, but is very rarely used for casual music files. I recommend you play with the bit rate instead of the sample rate. Personally I think AAC @ 128 kbps sounds pretty good for casual listening, but if I had lots of disk space and was listening more on my stereo than in the car, I'd probably go with 192 AAC. At some point we'll have enough space to have everything uncompressed on our disks, but for now I'd say you really get diminishing returns above 192. For MP3, I'd say 224 is the transition point, possibly 192 for a good LAME encoder.

But really you should let your own ears decide. Pick 4 or 5 of your favorite songs, hopefully dynamic songs that'll really test your encoders, encode them at different rates and perform your own blind listening tests on your own sound gear. Then you'll know what works for you.

 

[HiRez]

Forget both 44.1Khz and 48Khz. If it's excellent sound quality that you're after, then go for 96Khz.

Eh...I wouldn't go down this road if I were you unless you have really high-end kit. Remember than your average CD is 44.1 KHz and is not going to benefit at all from sampling above that. If you actually have 96 KHz sources, lots of disk space, and a killer sound system, then go for it, but otherwise I'd say forget it.

 

[absolut_mac]

No argument from me

Eh...I wouldn't go down this road if I were you unless you have really high-end kit. Remember than your average CD is 44.1 KHz and is not going to benefit at all from sampling above that. If you actually have 96 KHz sources, lots of disk space, and a killer sound system, then go for it, but otherwise I'd say forget it.

Your previous post gave him excellent advice. Most people aren't aware of all of the options, so I mentioned 96Khz in case he's doing his own recordings and only wants the best.

Besides, it's always good to hear what the best has to offer, then one can decide how much of a compromise one wants to accept.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Actually, neither the AAC or MP3 encoders in iTunes (nor iTunes itself for that matter) support a 96 KHz sample rate. 48 KHz is as high as it'll let you go. I encode all my stuff in Apple Lossless because I have a 160 GB external drive dedicated to my music library.