Posted by Wizard Of Oggs on 02/22/06 17:19

You may want to test a few to see if your ears can tell the difference.
Transcode a few mp3s to wma, then encode the same tracks to wma from the
source CD. Then compare.
Personally, I would never transcode anything lower than 192kbps. Some would
never transcode, period!
But your own ears should be the ulimate judge.
-The Wiz



<normanstrong@comcast.net> wrote in
news:RpCdnaaADb2yDGHenZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com:

> I have a large number of mp3s at 128kb/s. I've discovered thatI
> cannot tell the difference between this bit rate and a much lower wma
> variable bit rate, which takes up less than half the space. The
> question is: can I convert the mp3 to the wma directly, or would it
> be better to go back to the original CD and convert to wma in one
> pass?
>
> Obviously, it would be much, much easier to batch convert the mp3s to
> wma. I wonder how much difference there would be.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norm Strong
>
>

[Back to original message]