ffprobe of ffmpeg fame say:

  • bitrate: 256kb/s
  • Stream: #0:0: Audio: mp3 (mp3float), 44100 Hz, stereo, fltp, 256 kb/s

Is it better to buy the CD and rip or or is that about as good as it gon’ get? Should I quit while I’m ahead

Its literally nowhere else online in a hq format besides YouTube (lq) and various random blogs/sites

No FLACs :( until I change that

  • cheese_greater@lemmy.worldOP
    1·
    6 days ago

    I dont have issue with its quality but if tgeres higher quality available, i am inclined to obtain that if reasonably possible because i want the best available quality of the recording.

    Basically im asking if a CD rip could possibly improve upon what is already possessed

    • Alison Wilder@io.waxandleather.com
      1·
      6 days ago

      @cheese_greater CDs are 16-bit, 44.1 kHz lossless files and will technically offer more audio fidelity than any mp3.

      That said, there have been a lot of blind studies done. In any normal listening environment, almost no one can tell the difference between 320K MP3s and lossless WAV files.

      So if it’s a high quality MP3 and you don’t already know the answer to this question, I suspect you will not be able to tell the difference.

      @naught101

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        2·
        6 days ago

        The studies I’ve seen say that 160kbps is about the maximum where anyone can reliably detect any difference. I said 192 because that’s the next most common threshold above that. 320 almost doubles the file size for no gain for listening purposes, but if you’re not disk space constrained, there is no reason not to use it. V0 is my preference as it goes up to 320 or higher as needed, but compresses simpler audio a lot.

        Noting that higher rates are useful for e.g. audio production where effects are going to be applied.