Does it matter if i rip my cds as WMA or MP3

  hawthorn59 00:39 26 Jan 2009


Hi. Just wondering if it makes any difference whether I rip my cds as WMAs or MP3s? My friend says WMA is better as they take up less space, and practically all portable mp3 players will play them anyway. Is this the case?


  BigCam 01:20 26 Jan 2009

It is true that WMA takes up less space than MP3 to a point
As you can adjust the encoding of MP3 to a similar setting 128 kbs
If you have plenty HDD space I rip using 160kbs(CD Quality)
If you get an Ipod it wont play WMA files and would need to convert them and not many WMA converters out there
Also its easier to edit MP3s than WMA
Plus if you make up a music cd of MP3s they will play on most CD /MP3 car stereos/ DVD players but not if you use WMA
I just prefer using MP3s

  Batch 09:03 26 Jan 2009

If space is not an issue, MP3 is probably your best choice for the all the reasons BigCam has given.

However, I used WMA Variable Bit Rate (WMA-VBR) at the 50 - 95 Kbps setting in Windows Media Player so that I could get as many tracks as possible on to the memory I had available on my portable player (a Sansa Fuze). 50 - 95 Kbps would probably not be considered "high fidelity", but I find it OK.

VBR compression adjusts the number of bits used at any time according to the demands of the music, whereas fixed bit rates use the same number of bits regardless.

One issue with WMA-VBR is that you may find even less compatibility with portable players, than even fixed rate WMA.

  DippyGirl 09:17 26 Jan 2009

WM converter click here is a good general purpose video/audio converter - it will do WMA but not sure if it copes with VBR

  cocteau48 09:17 26 Jan 2009

Excellent converter:click here
should you need it.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Sea of Thieves Review

Dell Canvas review: the cheap Wacom Cintiq alternative

How to use iMovie for Mac, tips and more

Comment filmer l’écran d’un iPhone ?