128 kbps quality vs 256

Question

Level 1

7 points

128 kbps quality vs 256

I constructed a playlist in iTunes so it would fit on my iPod nano. I just synced that playlist on my iPod and the file size was about half of that on the computer. All the songs were converted from CD's to iTunes. After some research I found that all the CD's had been converted at 256 kbps but when I synced the iPod the converter bit rate was set at 128 kbps(default setting in iPod Summary Options) which explains why the resulting file size on my iPod was about half the file size of my iTunes playlist. OK. Got that. My question is how good is the resulting quality of the 128 kbps songs on my iPod? Probably not so much difference with ear buds but what about when I play through a higher quality in home sound system? Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated.

null-OTHER, Windows 10, accer pc

Posted on Mar 25, 2016 8:35 AM

Reply

Answer 1

hhgttg27

Level 5

5,597 points

Mar 25, 2016 8:57 AM in response to ehlersgrub

This is something of a "how long is a piece of string" question ... one of the variables involved is the type of music you listen to: a reduced bitrate may have obviously detrimental effects - even on standard earbuds - when applied to recordings with a wide dynamic range, particularly classical or jazz. Contemporary popular music, or "remasters" of older recordings that suffer from the "loudness war" where recordings are compressed to sound as loud as possible may suffer less.

Having said that, across a reasonable wide range of music within my library I find that 256k AAC / 320k MP3 is acceptable across several different platforms: iPod with mid-range Sennheiser earbuds (not ridiculously expensive but considerably better than those supplied by Apple), PCs with desktop speakers, hi-fi system with Bluetooth audio adapter (though in the last case I'll still listen to CDs by preference). With a few exceptions I would normally be able to detect a lower bit rate recording (though without doing proper double-blind testing there's always an element of subjectivity). I certainly don't see any benefit to me of downsampling as I sync to an iPod (my default device is a 16GB nano 7G, so at 256k/320k I still get around 100 hours of music on there).

Reply

Answer 2

ed2345

Level 9

63,602 points

Mar 25, 2016 9:06 AM in response to ehlersgrub

Ehlersgrub,

Also note that the "shrink-and-sync" capability creates compressed files for the iPod, but does not alter the original file that is in your library. If you change your mind, you can simply resync your iPod with that setting on 128, 192, 256, or turned off altogether.

Reply

Answer 3

ehlersgrub Author

Level 1

7 points

Mar 25, 2016 9:10 AM in response to hhgttg27

I guess you are saying I might experience some loss especially with better quality ear buds or when playing on a better quality sound system via blue tooth. My intention was not to further compress the music from my iTunes playlist to get more on the iPod. It was an accident because the bit transfer was set at 128 kbps. I am wondering if I should go back and redo the whole process at 256 kbps.

Reply

Answer 4

hhgttg27

Level 5

5,597 points

Mar 25, 2016 9:18 AM in response to ehlersgrub

Unless you have a specific reason to downsample as you sync I would clear that setting and update your iPod again.

Reply