Customer Discussions > mp3 discussion forum

320Kps PLEASE...


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 151-174 of 174 posts in this discussion
Posted on 17 Jan 2012 02:08:51 GMT
Britpop says:
One more in favour of FLAC, especially now that fibre optic broadband is making larger downloads more feasible. I buy increasingly from Juno, Bleep and Boomkat - can find most, but not all, that I'm looking for in FLAC there.

Posted on 21 Jan 2012 17:01:29 GMT
E.G. "Hidden orchestra - Night Walks", price of wav file on Juno 13,27 price of cd on Amazon Marketplace 6,50 (delivery included!)... We gotta be crazy...

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jan 2012 18:22:28 GMT
T.J.Byford says:
D P French, I fully endorse your posting on 5th Jan.

I am mostly interested in classical music where I need, and without being elitist one bit, higher bit rates to maintain quality for the various nuances produced. And have you noticed that very recently, in a number of cases Amazon are charging the same price for an mp3 download as they are selling the CD for!!!! Now this would be fine if they offered a lossless download comparable to CD, but you can bet your bottom dollar they won't. If you have any sense, you'll simply buy the CD, surely?

Posted on 26 Jan 2012 14:23:04 GMT
Mr. T. Mirza says:
Most sites these days offer MP3 downloads at 320 kbps. I'm sure you can do the same without much fuss. Let's all hope this happens sooner than later. Cheers.

Posted on 29 Jan 2012 12:50:57 GMT
Ryan Rowland says:
320CBR is a total waste of space. VBR is more than good enough for compressed. Both lossless and VBR options would be best, and I really hope it happens soon.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jan 2012 12:55:06 GMT
nephran says:
It's not gonna thems happen Ryan...Space saving V.B.R. is what is required...And Amazon view Lossless as for audiophiles only..

Posted on 31 Jan 2012 00:40:02 GMT
I would definitely purchase more of my mp3s from Amazon if they offered 320. Now I rather purchase through specialty retailers such as Juno and Beatport. I love the one click purchase, but 256 won't cut it for me.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Feb 2012 15:31:40 GMT
Helen says:
I can hear a difference and I am human I can assure you. I have never been called a dog (at least to my face!!). Play.com although more expensive offer all their downloads at 320kbps and there is quite a bit of difference in quality. Some of the tracks and albums available here on amazon have been compressed to death. I recently purchased Florence + The Machine Ceremonials album when it was on weekly deal for 3.99 and the sound quality was dreadful. I bought the download again from play.com and the sound quality was so much better. So there is a difference.

Posted on 27 Mar 2012 03:10:04 BDT
I can tell the difference between 256 and 320. I bought a cd because it was not available on CD only MP3. My last purchase of downloaded music. There was a reason that cds were at the level they were at. 256 just does not have the depth of sound. Sounds flat. Stupid idea by Amazon.

Posted on 6 May 2012 13:36:12 BDT
I have just downloaded a track to play on my radio show, in the context of a DJ set. A 219kbps VBR mp3 sounds horrible when sped up or slow down (while CBR does not for reasons too long to go into here) so basically, I've just wasted my money. Can we please have 320kbps CBR or even better, FLACs offered. I would be happy to pay the extra to get audio that doesn't sound horrific next to the other tracks that I'm playing! I won't be buying any more digital music from Amazon until this is available. Thanks.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 May 2012 13:42:37 BDT
Helen says:
If you are happy to pay a little extra for better quality visit Play.com website as their downloads are all 320kbps but they are more expensive than amazon and don't automatically transfer to itunes or windows media player as amazon downloads do. You can get the majority of the tracks that amazon offers. I hope this has been helpful!!

In reply to an earlier post on 6 May 2012 17:36:49 BDT
Music Rules says:
I buy from 7digital who sell 320kbps, often 4-song EPs are also only 1.79. I'd love to buy from amazon more often but the quality is poor. Come on Amazon, make the change and please your customers.

Posted on 6 May 2012 18:55:09 BDT
getandym says:
320kbps please but I'm absolutely not prepared to pay more for what should be the standard.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 May 2012 19:54:21 BDT
Helen says:
Play's prices are usually about 99p or 1 so just a little bit more expensive. Another person in this thread recommends 7digital but I have not used this before. Do downloads tranfer/open automatically in either iplayer or windows media? This is one thing that I do like with amazon. I know play.com's downloads do not and this is a bit of a pain.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 May 2012 22:06:59 BDT
Grumpyrocker says:
Adding to your player isn't tricky, just a case of dropping the files into the relevant music folder.

I used to always use Amazon MP3 but in the last few months have stopped. I use both Play and 7Digital - depending which is cheaper at the time. Both supply 320k files and both let you re-download.

I recently re bought an album from Play that I'd had previously from Amazon, and there was a definite difference in quality between the files. Very noticeable on my Cowon player or PC speakers.

The quality of downloads on Amazon is poor, so being 1 cheaper is of no relevance at all. And I've had several incidents of buying from Amazon where there are duff files. I've reported these, and Amazon has refunded me and said they'd look into it. But those duff albums were still on sale. A few of the Slayer albums here on Amazon have terrible volume problems, with some tracks being so quiet they approach the noise floor. I've also bought albums from Amazon that were mistakenly uploaded as mono. There's an Amon Amarth recent release that's like that.

I'd much rather use Bandcamp where lossless files can be had. But few bands are on there. But the next best thing is at least decent lossy downloads as offered by Play or 7Digital.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 May 2012 22:28:10 BDT
Helen says:
Thank you for the info :)

Posted on 11 May 2012 11:02:19 BDT
The last few downloads I've bought from Amazon have been very disappointing in terms on bitrate / sound quality (emptyset, spiritualised). I asked for a refund, deleted and rebought, 1 from Play and 1 from 7Digital.
Albums of the week seem to be ripped at counterproductively low bitrates, as I no longer have confidence in buying mp3's here.
Amazon should be upfront on the bitrate quality of each track, as a consumer I can then make an informed decision on whether I buy it here or buy it from another site where they publish bitrate. Currently, I can't trust the quality here.

In reply to an earlier post on 13 May 2012 00:07:37 BDT
D_V says:
If you have poor hearing, you probably can't tell the difference between 256 and 320.

Posted on 15 May 2012 13:42:32 BDT
JayJayDee says:
Pardon!

Posted on 19 May 2012 12:56:00 BDT
P. Gardner says:
320 Kbps is a must. People saying that there is little or no audible difference between 128

Posted on 19 May 2012 12:56:26 BDT
P. Gardner says:
320 Kbps is a must. People saying that there is little or no audible difference between 128 & 320 Kbps is a nonsense, unless you are playing the mp3s through a tinny phone speaker. Any bitrate lower than 256 will clealy show up as inferior if played on a decent sound system. So, as I just purchased 2 x 12"s which are no longer available anywhere else & priced at the equivalent of buying a cd, I was disappointed to discover all files ranged between 188 & 220 Kbps, well under par & not of a high enough quality to play on a big sound :( I'm fully aware of their saving space & transfer times by lower rate encoding but if you are charging a high price you should be backing it up with the quality sound, not monopolising on the product & being surprised by people searching out a higher quality rip on line which they can download for free.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 May 2012 18:37:26 BDT
creed says:
Sorry but that's ridiculous. I can most definitely hear the difference and I can certainly tell the difference between mp3 and FLAC on my system. If you can't hear it, it's most likely because your system isn't very good, or you really are deaf.

Posted on 3 Jun 2012 18:28:11 BDT
Helen says:
I was recommended 7 digital recently as their downloads are 320Kbps, but not all of the tracks are this quality. Some new downloads are available at 256kbps which still sound better than any from amazon.

Posted on 6 Jun 2012 10:52:26 BDT
Last edited by the author on 6 Jun 2012 11:52:30 BDT
Greebo says:
320kbps cbr is far better than the vbr offered. I always check for the best quality using other sites like HMV, Play.com & Tesco & prices vary from site to site so it is not fixed by the artist. Amazon is always my last resort due to its poorer quality, I usually prefer to buy the CD if there are 2 or more tracks I like. Amazon is resting on it's jaded laurels & is losing out on mine & other peoples money by burrowing its head in the sand over not upgrading its files. It should not cost any more to buy 320 as you can check on other sites which offer the same or cheaper price for better quality, shop around. Flac files are much larger & should be dearer. I do not use Flac for my DJ work due to it not being compatible with some of my software & its much longer loading times & memory usage when using very long playlists (800+). However I would prefer to download this format & Re-encode to 320kbps only when I edit the file in Soundforge so keeping it as high quality as possible.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the mp3 discussion forum (371 discussions)

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  mp3 discussion forum
Participants:  102
Total posts:  174
Initial post:  15 Dec 2008
Latest post:  6 Jun 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 14 customers

Search Customer Discussions