Is MP3 lower quality then Window Media Audio?

[Stiltzkin]

I went to rip a CD with WMP, and there's a selection of what file type I want and a selection for quality versus file size. When I select one of the Windows Media Audio options, I can move the slider along the quality/file size bar, buy when I select MP3 (Well, it says MPEG layer-3, I assume that's what MP3 stands for) the slider is placed all the way down at the low quality/small file size side, and I can't move it up. Is this because MP3s are naturally lower quality than WMA? If so, why on earth does everyone and their mothers use MP3 for all their music?

[fink]

Here's a page that describes both mp3 and wma file types. Mp3's came first and wma is Window's answer to it... the main difference is wma allows for copyright protection which is obviously why mp3 is the format of choice for underground/illegal copies of songs. wma files are also only playable on windows media player and mp3's have many different choices of software to play back on.

http://www.cyberwalker.net/columns/jan02/040102.html

As far as the quality bar goes it allows you to create less compressed rips of the songs but the higher quality the larger the file size.

[Stiltzkin]

Alright, that makes sense, but why can't I change the quality of the MP3s that I am ripping?

[fink]

The mp3 creation process isn't variable. It's always on max compression.

[Stiltzkin]

Alright, too bad, but I'd still rather have MP3s than anything else :) Thanks!

[Ridgerunr]

Get a decent ripping program and leave WMP for playback only would be my suggestion...:)

[Gerdog]

Here's the program I like:
http://download.com.com/3000-2140-10184345.html?tag=lst-0-20
Many people recommend CDex:
http://download.com.com/3000-2140-10138504.html?tag=lst-0-1
I also prefer to save Media Player for playback only.

[spragers2]

fink -

"The mp3 creation process isn't variable. It's always on max compression."

That's not entirely clear, though it may be 100% correct.

You can adjust the "quality" of an MP3 by changing the bitrate. it's like recording a WAV file at 22khz vs. 44khz - the higher the bitrate, the better the quality. I think 128kbps is fine for most applications, in the car, on the PC, etc. Anything lower and sound quality really suffers. I believe 192kbps is considered closest to CD quality without going overboard.

[Stiltzkin]

So if I can't change the bitrate with WMP, can anything else do it?

[spragers2]

Stiltzkin,

Try the software Gerdog suggested. I prefer CdEx myself.

Also remember that you can't raise the bitrate on an MP3 that you already made - well you can, but it won't sound any better. You can make it worse, though.

Not sure about the other one, but CdEx "rips" the CD tracks into temporary files on your hard drive at the original CD quality, and then can create MP3 files based on whichever quality settings you choose.

[Gerdog]

I've used dBpowerAMP Music Converter many times successfully to improve the quality of mp3s.
http://www.dbpoweramp.com/
After installing the program, it puts a "Convert to" option in your right click menu. For example, you can right click on a 128kbps mp3 and convert it to wave, then right click the resulting wave file and convert it to a 256kbps mp3 that sounds much better. It can convert a lower bitrate mp3 directly to a higher bitrate too, but I prefer to convert to wave first. It's a free program, and I think you'll really like it. All the mp3s that I've done this with sound much better after the re-encoding.

[Stiltzkin]

This looks very nice, thanks!

[chorro]

you can play wma files with old Winamp 2.8xx, not with just Windows Media Player exclusively...

wma files can have a lower bitrate, but have the same quality and use less space than mp3s.

[spragers2]

For example, you can right click on a 128kbps mp3 and convert it to wave, then right click the resulting wave file and convert it to a 256kbps mp3 that sounds much better.

If that's the case, the improvement in sound quality is purely interpretated, that is, the program is "making up" extra bits to fill in the space. Like the programs they have for cleaning up recordings from LP records. You can't convert a lower bitrate to a higher bitrate without adding audio information that wasn't there before.

[Gerdog]

I don't know exactly what you mean when you say "the improvement in sound quality is purely interpretated", but the original encoding process takes a wave file and removes some information and compresses the rest to creat the mp3 file. If a program can accurately put that information back in, the improvement in sound quality is very real. I challenge you to use dBpowerAMP Music Converter and convert a 128kb mp3 to wave, and then play the two files and compare them. If you can't hear the difference, you either have very poor speakers or very poor hearing. Maybe Stiltzkin can post back and see if he has noticed any difference after re-encoding a few songs to a higher bitrate.

[spragers2]

takes a wave file and removes some information

If you remove information, you can't get it back without guessing at what was there in the first place. I'm not saying it doesn't sound better afterward - I'm saying the the improvement is "made up" by the software, that's all :)

[Gerdog]

Well, if you think about it, most digital music is just "made up" by the software that originally converted it from analog wave to digital. I'd still prefer to listen to record albums and cassette tapes (and even my old 8-tracks) instead of cds if they didn't wear out with use.