What's the equivalent MP2 bitrate of a 128 kbps MP3?

[Orlics]

I'm about to encode an SVCD, and I'd just like to wonder which bitrate I should use for my MP2 file. I've heard stories of crackling and hissing noises at 192 kbps and below, but if the source file isn't that great to begin with, maybe it'd be alright.

Basically I'm asking which MP2 bitrate would sound similar to a 128 kbps MP3.

Thanks in advance.

[lordsmurf]

192k MP2 would be the equivalent. If somebody had noise, they made a mistake.

Anyway, this is SVCD. The spec is 224k. You have no choice in the matter.

[rumplestiltskin]

If your software permits XSVCD, you may use 192k for the audio (and even alter the video bitrate up or down to fit).

[Hyper Shinchan]

Audio:
44100 Hz
32 - 384 kbit/sec MPEG-1 Layer2 or MPEG2 Audio
with up to 2 Audio Tracks

These are the specs of SVCD audio. You CAN use 192 kbp/s, it's in the standard, but maybe there are some stupid player that can read SVCD with this bitrate (I don't know this really, I ve not problem with 192 and 128 kbps MP2). It's not XSVCD.
EDIT: VCD 2.0 supports 128, 192, 224, 384 kbp/s in stereo, 64, 96, 192 in mono. This a part of the standard (VCD1.1 supports only 224 kbps).

[Orlics]

Thanks for the help, everyone.

Err, how about 112k OGG? And is there some sort of list or web page which lists these equivalents, or do I just have to estimate?

[ZippyP.]

MP2 sounds crappy at 128 and best at 224. Try it yourself and see. What else do you need to know?

[rumplestiltskin]

...112k OGG? And is there some sort of list or web page which lists these equivalents, or do I just have to estimate?

There's really no quantifiable comparison. mp3, ogg, et al are compression algorithms that utilize different techniques to come up with something that "sounds okay". Now, some will say that 160kbps mp3 is "good enough" while others claim to be able to detect 320kbps compression. The point is that all are related only in the sense that they attempt to make acceptable trade-offs and end up with something that sounds "good enough". You'll have to be the judge of that. So it may be that you find 112kbps ogg sounding very much the same as 128kbps mp3. It's all just a matter of opinion and your opinion is what matters.

I suppose you can use some kind of audio analysis software to check the waveforms and veebleforsters but it's really just your ears that will tell you what's right for your situation (iPod, CD, DVD, HD, etc.).

Hope this helps.

[p_l]

veebleforsters

Did you mean


http://www.tellun.com/motm/diy/tln904/TLN-904.html

or

http://www.things.org/~jym/fun/veeblefetzer.html?


:P

[vhelp]

Yes, and coinsidence too. Because you could be the one that is in receipt of
your audio files, from highest 'k' given -- could be 384k. And, in your
expereince, you have compressed them down to 128k, and with good results.
And, that is your expereince, *with your audio* and original highest 'k'
available at the time of your exploration of best compression testing
over time. This could be applied to many others as well. So..
.
Now, you are in receipt of an audio file, that you want to bring down to
a certain 'k' level. But, you are having dificulty with the audio's sound,
when *you* bring the 'k' down to a certain level that was (is) been acceptable
to you in past times, but can't figure out why its not working out the same way.
.
You have to remember that the user who compressed the audio used certain
compression techniques and settings that you are probably not familiar
with, but are not factoring into the 'hissing' equation of your issues.
And, couple this is other compression format, that you want to compress
to another format with.., and you can see why there are issues w/ completed
sounds level reproduction results. I suppose it's a gamble.

This is probably what your problem is. I'll be that if the source audio was
yours, you would not be having this trouble

-vhelp 3421