[DevilMind]

Assuming that bitrate in mp3 avaliable are
16-24-32-40-48-56-64-80-96-112-128-160-192-256-320-448 kb/s

I want to convert all bitrate in Mp3 (160-448) to codec Nero AAC-LC 128Kb/s M4a
via Foobar2000 converter to save disk space.

So, should i convert them directly from mp3 to m4a??
Or
1st mp3 to Lossless FLAC to m4a???

How can i Preserve my Meta Data & Album art from mp3 to m4a??

[Nil]

On 23 Aug 2012, DevilMind wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

Assuming that bitrate in mp3 avaliable are
16-24-32-40-48-56-64-80-96-112-128-160-192-256-320-448 kb/s

I want to convert all bitrate in Mp3 (160-448) to codec Nero
AAC-LC 128Kb/s M4a via Foobar2000 converter to save disk space.

So, should i convert them directly from mp3 to m4a??
Or
1st mp3 to Lossless FLAC to m4a???

In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)
to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.
There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is
redundant, and a waste of time.

How can i Preserve my Meta Data & Album art from mp3 to m4a??

If you use Foobar to do the conversion, it will preserve the metadata,
but not the art.

[DevilMind]

On Thursday, August 23, 2012 1:00:16 PM UTC+5, Nil wrote:
On 23 Aug 2012, DevilMind wrote in

rec.audio.pro:


In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)

to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.

There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is

redundant, and a waste of time.



is there any other way to save disk space on High bitrate Mp3 (160-448 Kb/s) ??

128 kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is.

[DevilMind]

In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)
to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.
There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is
redundant, and a waste of time.

my 128kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is
i want to save disk space on mp3 which are 160-448 kb/s by converting them to m4a 128kb/s

but is there any other way to do it??

[DevilMind]

In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)
to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.
There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is
redundant, and a waste of time.

my 128kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is
i want to save disk space on mp3 which are 160-448 kb/s by converting them to m4a 128kb/s

but is there any other way to do it??

[geoff]

"DevilMind" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, August 23, 2012 1:00:16 PM UTC+5, Nil wrote:
On 23 Aug 2012, DevilMind wrote in

rec.audio.pro:


In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)

to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.

There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is

redundant, and a waste of time.



is there any other way to save disk space on High bitrate Mp3 (160-448
Kb/s) ??

128 kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is.

Get a bigger disk. They hardly cost anything ....

geoff

[[email protected]]

Devil-
Assuming that bitrate in mp3 avaliable are
16-24-32-40-48-56-64-80-96-112-128-160-192-256-320-448 kb/s

I want to convert all bitrate in Mp3 (160-448) to codec Nero AAC-LC 128Kb/s M4a
via Foobar2000 converter to save disk space.

So, should i convert them directly from mp3 to m4a??
Or
1st mp3 to Lossless FLAC to m4a???

How can i Preserve my Meta Data & Album art from mp3 to m4a??
_______
First of all where is it stated that the highest mp3 bitrate is "448kbps"?? Where did you pull that fact out of?

[John Williamson]

DevilMind wrote:
In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)
to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.
There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is
redundant, and a waste of time.

my 128kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is
i want to save disk space on mp3 which are 160-448 kb/s by converting them to m4a 128kb/s

but is there any other way to do it??

Why not just use an MP3 quality modifier to reduce the bit rates?

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Modifier.shtml

All it does is change the bitrates of your files, leaving all the
metadata and artwork intact.

Or have you got a new player which will only play m4a files?

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

DevilMind wrote:
Assuming that bitrate in mp3 avaliable are
16-24-32-40-48-56-64-80-96-112-128-160-192-256-320-448 kb/s

I want to convert all bitrate in Mp3 (160-448) to codec Nero AAC-LC 128Kb/s M4a
via Foobar2000 converter to save disk space.

Translation: my music doesn't sound crappy enough, I want to make it sound
worse.

So, should i convert them directly from mp3 to m4a??
Or
1st mp3 to Lossless FLAC to m4a???

Either way, they're going to get converted to an uncompressed PCM file
internally and then re-encoded. There isn't any real transcoding that goes
on.

How can i Preserve my Meta Data & Album art from mp3 to m4a??

This is the least of your worries. Multiple layers of lossy compression is
a really bad idea. Re-encoding something that has already been through a
layer of lossy compression is bad news. If you want to re-encode, go back
to the original uncompressed PCM files.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

DevilMind wrote:

is there any other way to save disk space on High bitrate Mp3 (160-448 Kb/s) ??

128 kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is.

For God's sake you're already saving a tremendous amount over the original
unmutilated PCM files. How mcuh compression do you WANT?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

DevilMind wrote:

On Thursday, August 23, 2012 1:00:16 PM UTC+5, Nil wrote:
On 23 Aug 2012, DevilMind wrote in

rec.audio.pro:


In all cases you will be converting one lossily compressed file (mp3)

to another lossy format (AAC), and you will lose significant quality.

There is no way around it. An intermediate conversion to FLAC is

redundant, and a waste of time.



is there any other way to save disk space on High bitrate Mp3 (160-448
Kb/s) ??

128 kb/s & below mp3 will remain as is.

Given how inexpensive disc space is, what's the concern here? Why look
at all this effort? If you could afford the music in the first place,
should you be able to afford a larger drive?

Of course, if you're talking about music for which you haven't paid,
then this may not be your most favorable forum.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[Mike Rivers]

On 8/23/2012 2:01 PM, hank alrich wrote:

Given how inexpensive disc space is, what's the concern here? Why look
at all this effort? If you could afford the music in the first place,
should you be able to afford a larger drive?

Of course, if you're talking about music for which you haven't paid,
then this may not be your most favorable forum.

Isn't that how you get more music than you can store?

If it wasn't for the fact that the OP has some knowledge of
compressed formats (at least their names), I might think
that maybe he has a small portable music player (I have a
tiny 2 GB one that I travel with) and he wants to put as
many songs on it as he can. After all, portable players with
limited memory space, and not downloading, is how we got
perceptual encoding into music technology.

But I think he's just being cheap or trying to be cooler
than the next guy.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff