MP3s - 320 kbps vs 128 kbps - can you tell the difference?

[Bobblehead]

http://mp3ornot.com/

I got it right, but I'm not sure if that is good ears or good luck. I'd like to see a test like this with a bunch of samples.

[photon]

I got it right away, but I've listened to Pavarotti before. I've tried this with other music and I find stuff with acoustic guitar, higher frequency instruments, instrumentals, vocal stuff, basically stuff with tons of detail it's easier to tell, which I guess makes sense.

Bump that up to 192kbps, and it's a lot harder, and I think I tried some once with a high VBR and I don't think I was any better than chance.

[AC]

I got it right, I could hear the static in the 128 version, though the difference wasn't as noticeable as I would have thought.

I think anything above 192 is probably indistinguishable, but I still like to acquire the best quality MP3s that I can.

[BlackArcher101]

Hard to notice with that example, but in my library with rock songs the difference is night and day. Myself, I go for 192.

[HotHotHeat]

The fullness of the instrumental music is how I was able to tell. His voice a bit, but mostly the band.

[corporatejay]

i'm on a laptop so the sound sucks no matter what.....I got it wrong.

[Dion]

I got it right. It was the background instrumentals that did it for me. Been told i have a good ear for music.

[Ro]

i'm on a laptop so the sound sucks no matter what.....I got it wrong.

Yeah, I didn't listen to the samples, but in my experience, it's all about the speakers/headphones.

I was amazed at how crappy some of the music on my iPod that had low bitrates sounded after I got a good pair of headphones. You could hear every hiss, every inconsistency. They sounded 2D, flat, boring. Whereas the music encoded @256 or 320 kbps sounded orchestral, and 3D.

But if I was to play a file from each category on a pair of cheap computer speakers, it's significantly harder to tell the two apart.

[Bobblehead]

I found this article interesting.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/do_higher_mp3_bit_rates_pay_off?page=0%2C3

[ken0042]

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the same thing goes with listening to music. Your sound quality will only be as good as the weakest point along the line chain of items used to generate that sound. Back when I used to sell speakers I had other sales guys use 128 kbps MP3s to demo higher end speakers (over $1000/pair) and they would sound muddy. I would used store bought CDs and be able to bring out the quality of the sound.

I'll have to give these samples a listen when I get home, but in the past I have been able to easily notice the difference between 128 and 320 kbps MP3s. And I agree that as you go higher it is harder to notice a difference. For me it has never been about how many songs I can jam onto a device; rather the quality of the music.

[Hakan]

It's really easy to tell the difference between 128 and 192 imo.

You just need a halfway decent sound system and you can hear the high-ends clip into static. 192 to CD is hard to differentiate though. The only way you can really tell is witha really good system or using optical connectors.