I just found out that my 32 kbps mp3 files play more efficiently than the 128 kbps AAC/mp3 files. My ipod mini lasts much much longer with the lower bit rates... just a thought! 
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod Found out that lowbit rates save ipod battery life!
- Thread starter princealfie
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, there's less hard drive access which is a large proportion of an iPod's power usage. The reduced hard drive access comes about mainly because you can fit more songs in your buffer/RAM at any one time.
hows the quality. you haven't lost your hearing yet have you? blasting up those speakers to 7/8 of the way to hear a decent sound with all that scratching noise..
i'll pass thnk u very much. glad you saved battery life tho
i'll pass thnk u very much. glad you saved battery life tho
32 kbps MP3!
How's that sound for you? I can't imagine it being very good unless you're listening through tin cans and can't tell anyway...
How's that sound for you? I can't imagine it being very good unless you're listening through tin cans and can't tell anyway...
I started off ripping at 128, but now only use 192. I definitely noticed a difference in battery life, yeah, but it's well worth having better sound and less battery life to me. There's no way I could listen at 32kbps, I found even 128 a stretch.
32 kbps.. yikes. That's what I encode my MP3 ringtones for my cell phone at... Because it's only got one speaker and a crappy one at that. I think the cost outweighs the benefit here.
not everyone hear has the need to listen to have pristine quality music on their iPod. I mostly listen to 128kbps mp3s on my iPod and sometimes even lower *gasp* if it's a lower quality recording in general. In fact they don't sound as bad as everyone makes them out to be...If you are just listening to ear buds and never really plan on needing to listen to it on a high quality stereo, there's nothing wrong with saving HD space/battery life.russed said:
my 2 cents
rockthecasbah said:not everyone hear has the need to listen to have pristine quality music on their iPod. I mostly listen to 128kbps mp3s on my iPod and sometimes even lower *gasp* if it's a lower quality recording in general. In fact they don't sound as bad as everyone makes them out to be...If you are just listening to ear buds and never really plan on needing to listen to it on a high quality stereo, there's nothing wrong with saving HD space/battery life.
my 2 cents
This guy's listening to them at 32 kbps though.. Would you be willing to put all your music that low? Do you know what it sounds like? If you can't tell the difference, more power to you, but otherwise... eh....
... my lord....
I knew that high bitrates took up much more battery...
yet...
I've been wondering why my battery has lasted a short amount of time.
...... I just put 2 and 2 together....
I have some nice headphones, and I like my high quality songs (256/320aac), and I play these almost exclusively.
Wow, it really makes you feel stupid when you finally connect the dots between two pieces of knowledge...
I knew that high bitrates took up much more battery...
yet...
I've been wondering why my battery has lasted a short amount of time.
...... I just put 2 and 2 together....
I have some nice headphones, and I like my high quality songs (256/320aac), and I play these almost exclusively.
Wow, it really makes you feel stupid when you finally connect the dots between two pieces of knowledge...
With Apple's earbuds, it's difficult to tell the difference between higher quality bitrates and lower quality bitrates because the emitters are so small. If you have higher quality headphones with better sound reproduction, of course you can tell the difference.
yes i do, if you read my post i said i've listened to and have a few 32kbps mp3s. It doesn't sound much worse than normal sized songs on the earbuds included with the iPod itself. I mean you can have the highest quality music, but if your ear buds suck, you might as well save space and battery life to a smaller file.Rocksaurus said:This guy's listening to them at 32 kbps though.. Would you be willing to put all your music that low? Do you know what it sounds like? If you can't tell the difference, more power to you, but otherwise... eh....
rockthecasbah said:
I did read your post... You didn't mention putting your music in 32kbps. Just to clear up any confusion, go ahead and read your own post:
rockthecasbah said:not everyone hear has the need to listen to have pristine quality music on their iPod. I mostly listen to 128kbps mp3s on my iPod and sometimes even lower *gasp* if it's a lower quality recording in general. In fact they don't sound as bad as everyone makes them out to be...If you are just listening to ear buds and never really plan on needing to listen to it on a high quality stereo, there's nothing wrong with saving HD space/battery life.
my 2 cents
If it's a lower quality recording I can see toning it down but I have a really low quality recording on my computer and 96kbps is as far down as I can go before I start losing sounds in the song... Certainly I wouldn't disagree that on a select few recordings you could take the quality down a few notches, but if you're only doing it on a few songs the difference in battery life would be negligible. If you're going to do it on a large chunk of your library the battery life increase would be noticeable, but so would the quality decrease... even on a pair of Apple earbuds. Unless of course all you listen to is Metallica
*ducks*