Getting closer to to rip/burn decisions

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by lmnop, Nov 27, 2004.

  1. lmnop

    lmnop Guest

    OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP because
    I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP but it would
    not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it is still WMA, but
    the files are very small and got a load of stuff on that CD.
    So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128 kbps,
    and burned that to CD.
    I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    crap.
    So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting for
    the original rip???
    If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files, but I
    want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and want the
    quality to reproduce audio CD's.

    128 kbps
    192 kbps
    256 kbps
    320 kbps

    I am getting closer, thanks for the help.
    --
    From the Desk of: Jesse A. Harrington
     
    lmnop, Nov 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. lmnop

    Toolman Tim Guest

    "lmnop" <abc.123@xyz> wrote in message
    news:vATpd.27686$01.us.to.verio.net...
    | OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    | I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP
    because
    | I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP but it
    would
    | not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it is still WMA,
    but
    | the files are very small and got a load of stuff on that CD.

    Correct - you cannot make an MP3 disk from WMA using WMP. Just won't happen.
    Unless you pay for an add-in for MP3 in WMP.

    | So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    | I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128 kbps,
    | and burned that to CD.
    | I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    | crap.
    | So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    | quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting
    for
    | the original rip???

    Correct again. You cannot improve the quality of music alread ripped to your
    hard drive. Your best bet is to rip a new copy. And if you convert WMA to
    MP3, you will probably lose more quality.

    | If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files, but
    I
    | want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and want
    the
    | quality to reproduce audio CD's.
    |
    | 128 kbps
    | 192 kbps
    | 256 kbps
    | 320 kbps
    |
    | I am getting closer, thanks for the help.

    If you plan on using the CDs you burn primarily in the car, stay with the
    128 or 192 kbps. You'll get good enough sound for a car, and get plenty on a
    disc. If you think the CDs will also be used elsewhere, (and if hard drive
    space isn't an issue anymore) burn as high as you want. Personally, I'm 46,
    my hearing is deteriorated from working in a mill for a dozen years, and I
    won't rip anything over 192 because even in a Walkman type player, I can't
    tell the difference. You might be able to, and so it makes perfectly good
    sense to record at a higher rate.

    Another consideration is the type of music. I rip classical at 192, but
    "oldies" don't need that. Heck, unless they are digitally remastered, they
    didn't have that good of a quality anyway <g>! Country, pop, etc., need at
    least 128 or 160. Punk or heavy metal never made it into my house ;o) so I
    haven't a clue about that.
     
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Toolman Tim wrote:

    > Personally, I'm 46,


    Man, NOBODY is 46! Sheesh.

    --
    Must be a typo.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Nov 27, 2004
    #3
  4. lmnop

    lmnop Guest

    S I am correct in assuming that I have no control over the burn.
    For example; If I rip at 320 kbps WMP does not give me the control to burn
    at a lower quality.
    And if not, is there software that gives me that control?
    I am hoping that as long as WMP is creating mp3's, that there is no harm in
    using WMP for ripping.
    I will create 4 data disk at the four different settings and turn them up in
    the truck and listen to them over the next few days to get a better idea of
    where I need to rip.
    Thanks
    --
    From the Desk of: Jesse A. Harrington
    "Toolman Tim" <> wrote in message
    news:nRTpd.19254$...
    >
    > "lmnop" <abc.123@xyz> wrote in message
    > news:vATpd.27686$01.us.to.verio.net...
    > | OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    > | I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP
    > because
    > | I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP but it
    > would
    > | not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it is still WMA,
    > but
    > | the files are very small and got a load of stuff on that CD.
    >
    > Correct - you cannot make an MP3 disk from WMA using WMP. Just won't
    > happen.
    > Unless you pay for an add-in for MP3 in WMP.
    >
    > | So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    > | I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128
    > kbps,
    > | and burned that to CD.
    > | I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    > | crap.
    > | So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    > | quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting
    > for
    > | the original rip???
    >
    > Correct again. You cannot improve the quality of music alread ripped to
    > your
    > hard drive. Your best bet is to rip a new copy. And if you convert WMA to
    > MP3, you will probably lose more quality.
    >
    > | If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files,
    > but
    > I
    > | want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and want
    > the
    > | quality to reproduce audio CD's.
    > |
    > | 128 kbps
    > | 192 kbps
    > | 256 kbps
    > | 320 kbps
    > |
    > | I am getting closer, thanks for the help.
    >
    > If you plan on using the CDs you burn primarily in the car, stay with the
    > 128 or 192 kbps. You'll get good enough sound for a car, and get plenty on
    > a
    > disc. If you think the CDs will also be used elsewhere, (and if hard drive
    > space isn't an issue anymore) burn as high as you want. Personally, I'm
    > 46,
    > my hearing is deteriorated from working in a mill for a dozen years, and I
    > won't rip anything over 192 because even in a Walkman type player, I can't
    > tell the difference. You might be able to, and so it makes perfectly good
    > sense to record at a higher rate.
    >
    > Another consideration is the type of music. I rip classical at 192, but
    > "oldies" don't need that. Heck, unless they are digitally remastered, they
    > didn't have that good of a quality anyway <g>! Country, pop, etc., need at
    > least 128 or 160. Punk or heavy metal never made it into my house ;o) so I
    > haven't a clue about that.
    >
    >
     
    lmnop, Nov 27, 2004
    #4
  5. lmnop

    Toolman Tim Guest

    "lmnop" <abc.123@xyz> wrote in message
    news:GXTpd.27687$01.us.to.verio.net...
    |S I am correct in assuming that I have no control over the burn.
    | For example; If I rip at 320 kbps WMP does not give me the control to burn
    | at a lower quality| And if not, is there software that gives me that
    control?

    Not that I know of. What you rip it at, that's what gets burned to CD later.
    For your audio track type CDs, it's irrelevant - rip as high as you can. It
    will always expand to fill the same amount of minutes. You rip at 64, it
    takes as much room as audio as a file ripped at 320. Except it sounds like
    crap.

    | I am hoping that as long as WMP is creating mp3's, that there is no harm
    in
    | using WMP for ripping.

    For most people, no. There are purists out there who prefer specialized
    ripping software with other MP3 encoders. I can't hear the difference,
    especially not in my car.

    | I will create 4 data disk at the four different settings and turn them up
    in
    | the truck and listen to them over the next few days to get a better idea
    of
    | where I need to rip.

    That's the ticket! The final output, and how it sounds to you, is the only
    real important thing to consider. Your drive will probably read CDRW - you
    can erase the ones that don't work as well as you'd like.
     
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2004
    #5
  6. lmnop

    Old Gringo Guest

    lmnop wrote:
    > OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    > I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP because
    > I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP but it would
    > not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it is still WMA, but
    > the files are very small and got a load of stuff on that CD.
    > So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    > I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128 kbps,
    > and burned that to CD.
    > I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    > crap.
    > So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    > quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting for
    > the original rip???
    > If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files, but I
    > want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and want the
    > quality to reproduce audio CD's.
    >
    > 128 kbps
    > 192 kbps
    > 256 kbps
    > 320 kbps
    >
    > I am getting closer, thanks for the help.

    Install windows media player in your Ford.

    --
    Old Gringo George
    Just West Of Nowhere
    Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    Freedom For The World <http://www.nuboy-industries.com/>
     
    Old Gringo, Nov 27, 2004
    #6
  7. lmnop

    Jim Guest

    2 or 3 people have this problem about 17 times a day, Bills got his, stick
    to MP3 it works. 22% to 23% might go with the numbers but its allways the
    other 33 and a third that make the difference.
    "Old Gringo" <> wrote in message
    news:NeUpd.38116$...
    > lmnop wrote:
    >> OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    >> I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP
    >> because I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP
    >> but it would not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it
    >> is still WMA, but the files are very small and got a load of stuff on
    >> that CD.
    >> So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    >> I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128
    >> kbps, and burned that to CD.
    >> I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    >> crap.
    >> So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    >> quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting
    >> for the original rip???
    >> If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files,
    >> but I want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and
    >> want the quality to reproduce audio CD's.
    >>
    >> 128 kbps
    >> 192 kbps
    >> 256 kbps
    >> 320 kbps
    >>
    >> I am getting closer, thanks for the help.

    > Install windows media player in your Ford.
    >
    > --
    > Old Gringo George
    > Just West Of Nowhere
    > Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    > Freedom For The World <http://www.nuboy-industries.com/>



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
     
    Jim, Nov 27, 2004
    #7
  8. lmnop

    Old Gringo Guest

    Jim wrote:
    > 2 or 3 people have this problem about 17 times a day, Bills got his, stick
    > to MP3 it works. 22% to 23% might go with the numbers but its allways the
    > other 33 and a third that make the difference.
    > "Old Gringo" <> wrote in message
    > news:NeUpd.38116$...
    >
    >>lmnop wrote:
    >>
    >>>OK, I know I will be shot down for using WMP, but my needs are simple.
    >>>I learned that I could not make mp3's with my music files using WMP
    >>>because I ripped them in WMA format. I tried to make a data CD with WMP
    >>>but it would not play in the Ford. Just looked at the properties and it
    >>>is still WMA, but the files are very small and got a load of stuff on
    >>>that CD.
    >>>So I ripped a CD at the best quality, 320 kbps and burned that to a CD.
    >>>I deleted that file and ripped it again at the lowest quality of 128
    >>>kbps, and burned that to CD.
    >>>I did that to experiment, I am sure the quality of the last will not be
    >>>crap.
    >>>So I am assuming that the only control I have in WMP over the
    >>>quality/file-size of the burn is a direct result of the quality setting
    >>>for the original rip???
    >>>If that is so, what setting should I rip at. I want quality mp3 files,
    >>>but I want to find the balance I need to get the most hours on a CD, and
    >>>want the quality to reproduce audio CD's.
    >>>
    >>>128 kbps
    >>>192 kbps
    >>>256 kbps
    >>>320 kbps
    >>>
    >>>I am getting closer, thanks for the help.

    >>
    >>Install windows media player in your Ford.
    >>
    >>--
    >>Old Gringo George
    >>Just West Of Nowhere
    >>Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    >>Freedom For The World <http://www.nuboy-industries.com/>

    >
    >
    >
    > ---
    > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
    >
    >

    Nothing like a 33 1/3 LP :)

    --
    Old Gringo George
    Just West Of Nowhere
    Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    Freedom For The World <http://www.nuboy-industries.com/>
     
    Old Gringo, Nov 27, 2004
    #8
  9. Jim wrote:

    > ---
    > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    > Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004



    I noticed a few days ago that the new 7.0 version of AVG seems to be
    using the correct delimiter for the sig (not that the sig means anything
    anyway). Perhaps an update would be in order?
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Nov 27, 2004
    #9
  10. Rôgêr wrote:

    > Jim wrote:


    >> ---
    >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    >> Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004



    > I noticed a few days ago that the new 7.0 version of AVG seems to be
    > using the correct delimiter for the sig (not that the sig means anything
    > anyway). Perhaps an update would be in order?


    A better order would be killing the whole thing. And some fries. :)

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Play Zork: http://www.xs4all.nl/~pot/infocom/zork1.html
    SOME commands: get, open, drop, directions e/n/s/w, climb, up,
    down, look, read, inventory, hit/kill [object] with [object]...
     
    Blinky the Shark, Nov 27, 2004
    #10
  11. lmnop

    Scraggy Guest

    Rôgêr wrote:
    > Toolman Tim wrote:
    >
    >> Personally, I'm 46,

    >
    > Man, NOBODY is 46! Sheesh.


    Bloody hell I must be the walking dead then.
    --
    Insults are effective only where emotion is present.

    "Who Mourns for Adonais?" stardate 3468.1.
     
    Scraggy, Nov 27, 2004
    #11
  12. lmnop

    dadiOH Guest

    lmnop wrote:

    > I will create 4 data disk at the four different settings and turn
    > them up in the truck and listen to them over the next few days to
    > get a better idea of where I need to rip.


    Ummm...4 songs at different bit rates on the *same* disc would be more
    frugal.

    --
    dadiOH
    ____________________________

    dadiOH's dandies v3.05...
    ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
    LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
    Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
     
    dadiOH, Nov 27, 2004
    #12
  13. lmnop

    lmnop Guest

    I had my head so full of new knowledge that I did not think of that.
    I will do that.

    "dadiOH" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > lmnop wrote:
    >
    >> I will create 4 data disk at the four different settings and turn
    >> them up in the truck and listen to them over the next few days to
    >> get a better idea of where I need to rip.

    >
    > Ummm...4 songs at different bit rates on the *same* disc would be more
    > frugal.
    >
    > --
    > dadiOH
    > ____________________________
    >
    > dadiOH's dandies v3.05...
    > ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
    > LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
    > Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
    >
    >
     
    lmnop, Nov 27, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <> dadiOH <>
    wrote:
    >
    >lmnop wrote:
    >
    >> I will create 4 data disk at the four different settings and turn
    >> them up in the truck and listen to them over the next few days to
    >> get a better idea of where I need to rip.

    >
    >Ummm...4 songs at different bit rates on the *same* disc would be more
    >frugal.


    Everyone who's lacs de fa? originale knew * exactly * I meant what
    the. Obviously he is a bit slow dans that le d?rtement... or his
    delusion's gone full blown...

    --
    Lady Chatterly

    "LadyChatterly was referring to your alien friends got chased away by
    your constant thinking of them." -- yyyiiinnnggg
     
    Lady Chatterly, Nov 27, 2004
    #14
  15. lmnop

    Toolman Tim Guest

    "Rôgêr" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    | Toolman Tim wrote:
    |
    | > Personally, I'm 46,
    |
    | Man, NOBODY is 46! Sheesh.
    |
    |
    Yeah - Mom's birthday was last week. I told one of the ladies at work that
    Mom turned 70, and she looked at me and said "Gawd, you're *old*!"

    Really made my day. NOT! <g>
     
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2004
    #15
  16. lmnop

    Toolman Tim Guest

    "Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    | Rôgêr wrote:
    |
    | > Jim wrote:
    |
    | >> ---
    | >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    | >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    | >> Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004
    |
    |
    | > I noticed a few days ago that the new 7.0 version of AVG seems to be
    | > using the correct delimiter for the sig (not that the sig means anything
    | > anyway). Perhaps an update would be in order?
    |
    | A better order would be killing the whole thing. And some fries. :)
    |

    Chili cheese fries? Man...I can hear my arteries hardening just thinking
    about it <g>
     
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2004
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Larry

    Decisions Decisions

    Larry, Jun 28, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    312
    Jason Smith
    Jun 28, 2005
  2. Waterspider

    Decisions, decisions...

    Waterspider, Dec 28, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    311
    Waterspider
    Dec 28, 2005
  3. cowboyz

    getting alot closer.

    cowboyz, Jul 13, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    615
    Lennier
    Nov 21, 2003
  4. steve

    closer...closer....RAM-based system

    steve, Sep 12, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    425
    Dogboy
    Sep 15, 2006
  5. Max Burke

    Decisions, Decisions....

    Max Burke, Sep 15, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    717
    Earl Grey
    Sep 24, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page