skip to content »

ik-kem.ru

Validating mflv 2110

validating mflv 2110-87

The real issue is whatever lossy scheme is applied at the encoding stage (psychoacoustic filters etc.)I don't think he expects it to be of higher quality than the input source, but wants to know if, say, transcoding a 128kbs AAC to a 192kbs or 256kbs MP3 will sound better than if he transcodes it to a 128kbs MP3.I've wondered the same thing since I have a bunch of AAC files that I sometimes convert to MP3 since the car player only understands MP3.

This will obviously not improve the quality, but it will avoid further degrading it. Another case of Stack Overflow's bias in favor of answers that say never to do something that's usually a bad idea, against answers that recognize the corner case.In the best case the only result will be, as you suggest, larger files.In the worst case the files could even be of worse quality as the second lossy encoder is tying to encode the output from a previous lossy encoder. There might be benefits in recoding at higher bitrate if you have a lossless source and are converting to a lossy output.Think about it this way: when it was converted from the original media (let's say a CD) it was compressed to fit the "content" in a smaller "box", and by doing so an amount of data has been lost (you may want to read about lossy and lossless formats).If you subsequently increase the bitrate, you are just making the "box" bigger, but the "content" is always the same.If you have a file with 95kbps in a highly efficient format, to retain the same quality, a relatively inefficient format as mp3 needs a higher bitrate.

Of course you will never get anything back that was lost in the first place.

320kbps are probably wasted space, but for mp3 something in the order between 128 and 192 is needed to maintain - or at least come close to - the quality of a more efficient 95kbps file.

@Luke Put differently, converting a 96kb/s flash-audio format directly to a 96kb/s MP3 may cause additional data-loss. A 96kb/s MP3 file may destroy data present in the flash-audio version.

Does it make sense to use a higher bitrate when converting to mp3? This isn't really a useful answer to the OP's question.

Sure, re-encoding at a higher bit-rate using another lossy algorithm is not going to improve the quality, but as the other answer below rightly says, if you have to use e.g.

We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context.