Skip to main content

Topic: Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun? (Read 4708 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Yes, they'd be completely useless...but I'm curious if anyone else has tried this on some of their favorite songs just for the heck of it.

  • db1989
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #1
Have you? I can't think of any purpose in asking other people about what is obviously a foregone conclusion, but in any case, it doesn't warrant placement in MP3 Tech.

Having said that and moved this, carry on, I guess. Maybe I'm wrong!

  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #2
Have you? I can't think of any purpose in asking other people about what is obviously a foregone conclusion, but in any case, it doesn't warrant placement in MP3 Tech.

Having said that and moved this, carry on, I guess. Maybe I'm wrong!

Eh, you're probably right.  Feel free to lock/delete.
To answer your question, I have - to test some of the extremes of LAME and other encoders - but again, not for any practical reason.

  • sheh
  • [*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #3
A friend of mine used to encode stuff at 64kbit/22kHz. Hmm... maybe still does.



  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #4
Motivated by a recent discussion here on 32kHz resampled 128 kbps mp3s I did some tests, with problem samples as well as some of my favorite music, with an experimental  -V5+ and -V4+ functional extension of 3.99.5z.
IMO it's not absurd at all to use it, but even I who's not sensitive to pre-echo could ABX the restricted temporal resolution on a -V4+ version of a critical non-problem track (Rickie Lee Jones' Under The Boardwalk). However the issue was not very obvious to me, and for people not sensitive to pre-echo this might be a good choice as 32 kHz sampling frequency is good for the quality of tonal parts of the music. Anyway nothing I'd like to use personally.
  • Last Edit: 24 October, 2012, 01:21:39 AM by halb27
lame3995o -Q1

  • Nessuno
  • [*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #5
Not a pointless question at all: some internet radios stream 32kpbs mp3.
... I live by long distance.

  • db1989
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #6
I take it back (a bit ).

I'm quite surprised that online radio would still be using such a low quality level; I know there are a few reasons to do so, but I would have imagined they were all in the past by now. Interesting to know, in any case!

  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #7
I take it back (a bit ).

I'm quite surprised that online radio would still be using such a low quality level; I know there are a few reasons to do so, but I would have imagined they were all in the past by now. Interesting to know, in any case!

Hmm...AM stations perhaps?  I'm a bit surprised by this too...I didn't think anyone was below 96kbps anymore.

  • Nessuno
  • [*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #8
Hmm...AM stations perhaps?  I'm a bit surprised by this too...I didn't think anyone was below 96kbps anymore.

BBC outside UK, for example (48kbps AAC): http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=792071

Consider also that full broadband for free on the other side is not always a given, therefore some radios offer more than one stream at different quality for the listener to choose.
... I live by long distance.

  • smok3
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Moderator
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #9
Yes, they'd be completely useless...but I'm curious if anyone else has tried this on some of their favorite songs just for the heck of it.

Sure, 6 or 7 years ago > to make ringtones for my older phones (The results are very pre-processing and song related, for example Pink Panther theme did sound pretty good (on a phone)).
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung

  • AndyH-ha
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #10
I have done many audio books in VBR that comes out at about that bitrate, on average. It does the job very well. I know no reason to adopt a higher bitrate.

I've also read a few comments that seem to suggest Audible books are 64kbps, but those are two channels. It would depend on the coding parameters, which are not revealed, but it could mean 32kbps each identical channel.

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #11
Doesn't Audible use joint stereo?

  • AndyH-ha
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #12
How might one find out?

  • DonP
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Ever tried encoding some 32kbps MP3s just for fun?
Reply #13
Hmm...AM stations perhaps?  I'm a bit surprised by this too...I didn't think anyone was below 96kbps anymore.

    ..
Consider also that full broadband for free on the other side is not always a given, therefore some radios offer more than one stream at different quality for the listener to choose.


Free?

People listening on mobile connections in the US or Canada generally have monthly caps.  2 GB is typical, but at least one is 512 MB before you get overage charges.

In rural areas lots of people are still stuck on dialup.

Stations I listen to regularly, I see between 24 and 128.  THe one on now seems to be VBR (rate changes as show in foobar) around 40 kb/s 22 khz mp3.

Some stations only let you listen through their own web page (flash) or mobile app so you can't tell the format or rate. (also can't use internet streaming "radios")