Maybe you should have used a compressed lossless format. 1GB per album would seem to be about three times larger than necessary.
Good morning. Here's what I would do as it seems you are in the Apple Eco-system: Spend the $24.99/year to subscribe to iTunes Match and upload all of your lossless files to the Cloud. The Cloud will accept Apple Lossless, AIFF, or WAV; as well as lossy MP3 or AAC. I'd go with lossless as your 1st option for uploads. In most cases, iTunes will match your music with AAC iTunes Plus files. In the cases there aren't matches, iTunes will transcode the lossless files to AAC iTunes Plus files. AAC iTunes Plus is Constrained Variable Bit Rate 256kbps files. If you have other Apple devices you can use iTunes Match to download or stream your Cloud music as you see fit. They will all be available across your devices in the iTunes Plus format. This is also a great time-saver once you get through the initial uploads. Make sure your metadata is how you want it before you start because it's easier to do it right the 1st time rather than fix it later.For what it's worth, bitrates above 160kbps are generally overkill with a good AAC encoder like iTunes or FhG AAC.Hope this helps. Best regards, LedHed8P.S.- Added Bonus -- You won't have to use local storage on any devices if you don't want, and the iTunes Cloud will do the lossy encoding for you.
I don't really want to fork out more than I already have to our mighty overlords in Cupertino
Would that mean then that in theory 320kbs VBR AAC is superior to 320kbs CBR AAC because the VBR would encoded the track at 320kbs as a minimum and only go higher or is there nowhere for it to go after 320kbs and thus it's just wasted space?
I'd really appreciate it if someone could run me through this, even if it's to appease my own curiosity.
600 albums lossless would be around 200GB.
I've just finished ripping my 600+ album collection using XLD on my Mac, all stored in a lossless format on an external hard drive (and further backed up on another kept off-site because there is simply no way I'm doing all that work again for anything).Now I'd like to play all my music on my MacBook with a modest speaker set-up while i work, ideally while not having an external hard drive hogging the USB port, and since 600GB worth of tunes is likely to choke up my machine I thought it sensible I convert to a lossy format to general play.Now my question is this, what should be the highest quality AAC encode I should aim for? While I know it's entirely subjective and a lot of people are saying that the iTunes Plus (256kbs VBR) option is a good enough compromise between sound quality and size but I have a 700GB+ hard drive in my Mac so would it be worthwhile going the full hog with 320kbs and should I go with the VBR option with that bit rate? Would that make any difference? I apologise in advance if I am treading old and unwelcome ground but I haven't been able to find anything that helpful so far online about the differences and/or benefits between 320kbs and 320kbs VBR AAC files so your recommendations would be very valuable.I don't want to have to re-encode everything in a couple of years so until a Mac can comfortably hold a decent sized lossless library then essentially I want the highest quality lossy format to tide me over for the foreseeable future.So, 256kbs VBR, 320kbs or 320kbs VBR?
(maybe in next ~10 years there will be better audio equipment available with more affordable prices).
PS: Please don't be mad - I really want to save as much data as possible and I would go lossless, but SD cards capacity is still too low for my CD's collection
Encoding file with 320 kbps gives bigger size that in 256 kbps - of course this even says less about real encoding quality, but is this mean that some more of audio data is preserved?
Higher bitrate usually means that frequency cutoff is higher and psychoacoustic threshold for audibility is lowered so that more of the less important parts are included. But this isn't a guarantee that higher bitrate file has better quality if they are from different encoders or they are encoded with some custom encoding parameters.
Somehow I believe that damaging music quality would be a disgrace and disregard to artists who created that music