Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- From: JethroUK© <reply@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 20:39:11 +0100
Thanks - I read a bit about m4a and there arguments both ways but it seems mp3 & m4a are much of a muchness (both lossy to similar degree) - i converted to mp3 (i can play them in car and house) but i stuck to 64 kps
"RalfG" <itsnotme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%235B1GrnCIHA.5980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If you don't plan on keeping copies of the original files, any loss in quality will be permanent. Anytime you decrease the bitrate you will lose quality. You may notice the degredation at 48kbps even with audio books but they should still be "not awfull" down to 32kbps. You will lose some quality just by converting to mp3, that's inherent in the process, but you might not notice it at 64kbps.
"JethroUK©" <reply@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%23nXM7tgCIHA.4196@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxI have some (several 100's hours) audio books in m4a 64 kbps
Will I loose (forever) any quality by converting to 64k in mp3?
For that matter would I loose any quality by converting to 48k in mp3?
I realise that different compression methods are more/less lossy than others - but then it's only audio books - hence the question
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- From: John Lockwood
- Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- References:
- m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- From: JethroUK©
- Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- From: RalfG
- m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- Prev by Date: Re: WMP 11 Downloading a streaming video
- Next by Date: Re: WMP 11 Downloading a streaming video
- Previous by thread: Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- Next by thread: Re: m4a vs mp3 anyone?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|