Jump to content

MP3 Quality Modifier


KiwiCoromandel

Recommended Posts

MP3 Quality Modifier enables you to easily change the quality of your mp3 files to reduce the file size while maintaining the desired level of audio quality and keeping your ID3 tags intact. The program achieves this primarily by adjusting the bitrate based on the selected quality profile or custom settings. Advanced users can also adjust the stereo settings and change the Sample Frequencies for additional control over the output results. You can process individual files or entire folders and view a before/after size comparison when the process is finished. MP3 Quality Modifier is designed to reduce file sizes of your MP3 files in order save disk space and/or to fit more music on your portable device without sacrificing sound quality. Standalone software, no installation required.

MP3 Quality Modifier is FREEWARE...

Main Features

* change mp3 quality with just a few clicks

* really easy and intuitive interface

* retain all ID3 tags with ease

* advanced options: detailed bitrate settings, sample frequency etc.

* quality comparison: compare created files with original ones

* multilingual: english, french, german, italian, portuguese, spanish

* portable: extremely small, just one executable, no installation

http://www.inspire-soft.net/files/MP3QualityModifier1.2.zip

http://www.inspire-soft.net/?nav=soft_mp3qualitymodifier

post-193-1254223916_thumb.jpg

post-193-1254223924_thumb.jpg

post-193-1254223932_thumb.jpg

post-193-1254223940_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/MP3-Q...r-/1252533058/1

Reviews of MP3 Quality Modifier:

#

myboy

Reviewing 1.13 (Sep 25, 2009)

Many commercial "mp3 quality changers" out there and if you want to reduce the bitrate than this freeware is quite good.

And well I really need it for my old 512mb mp3-player ;-)

# 1 out of 5 stars

allthebestnamesgone

Reviewing 1.13 (Sep 21, 2009)

on the plus side its free .... on the minus side its such a terrible idea to transcode your mp3s to another size

DONT DO IT

# 1 out of 5 stars

roj

Reviewing 1.13 (Sep 21, 2009)

OK, this is simply garbage.

Anyone who knows the first thing about lossy encoding is aware that re-encoding mp3s (or any lossy format for that matter) WILL result is additional quality loss that goes beyond what would be lost if you had encoded to the new bitrate natively in the first place.

Hard drive space is dirt cheap. mp3 players with Gb capacity are dirt cheap. So why would you be stupid enough to use this dreck? And why would you create it in the first place?

ONE star.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks very quick and simple to use. I have tried a few transcoders (not lately) and most of them will not keep the tags when you transcode from one format/bit rate to another. That is what got me started using Foobar2000. It keeps the tags. It also transcodes mp3's from one bit rate to another as well as converting flac, ape, wav, wv, mp3 and who knows what else to any of the ones I just mentioned. It will convert to and from different frequencies as well as 24bit to 16bit or whatever. It is also free but I wouldn't call it easy to use.

Hard drive space has gotten so large and cheap that I can't imagine anyone wanting to reduce the size of an mp3 except for low capacity portable mp3 players.

That line about reducing the file size without reducing the sound quality is absolute bullshit. There will be some degrading in sound that is very measurable. You may not really notice it if your mp3 player is cheap, so it doesn't matter, but it is lesser quality sound that will be noticeable on a decent sound system. Another thing I notice about the screenshots that Kiwi posted: the reduction improvements shown versus the bit rates shown don't add up. You can't get a 70% or better file size improvement by reducing a 320 mp3 to a decent vbr unless you (1) had a very low quality recording such as something from the 1940s when the original audio recording was poor, (2) change the bit depth from 24 to 16, which I don't recall ever seeing a lossy format in a 24 bit, (3) lower the frequency, the standard is 44100 but you can go higher and lower. If you have a 48khz 320 cbr and lower the frequency and the bit rate you can get to 70% plus, especially if you downsample it all the way to 22khz. I have a couple of older units and they will only play redbook standard which is 16bit depth 44100hz sampling frequency. They will play any bit rate cbr or vbr mp3 as well as wav. I hope everyone knows the difference between bit depth (generally 16 or 24) and bit rate (for mp3s - generally 128 to 320 or various vbrs). The file size increases as you increase any of the 3 items: bit rate, bit depth, sampling frequency. The sound quality diminishes as you downsample an audio recording by reducing any of those 3 items. If the audio is just a recording of an interview for instance, the quality reduction is small and irrelevant. In the case of a file that has a lot of things going on sonically, the reduction in quality is substantial.

I don't think anybody asked my opinion but there it is. And remember, my opinion is the only one that really counts. I'm sure everybody knows that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anybody asked my opinion but there it is. And remember, my opinion is the only one that really counts. I'm sure everybody knows that.

you did exactly what i hoped you would do when i posted this mate....you gave your expert opinion...another fine BK service... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I would go that far. :lol:

No. :lol:

Did I mention that Foobar2000 is also Windows only?? :lol:

Yes - just now. But I also noticed that neither of you mentioned Hasta La Vista :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found your mac song.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355">

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • Wait, Burning Man is going online-only? What does that even look like?
      You could have been forgiven for missing the announcement that actual physical Burning Man has been canceled for this year, if not next. Firstly, the nonprofit Burning Man organization, known affectionately to insiders as the Borg, posted it after 5 p.m. PT Friday. That, even in the COVID-19 era, is the traditional time to push out news when you don't want much media attention. 
      But secondly, you may have missed its cancellation because the Borg is being careful not to use the C-word. The announcement was neutrally titled "The Burning Man Multiverse in 2020." Even as it offers refunds to early ticket buyers, considers layoffs and other belt-tightening measures, and can't even commit to a physical event in 2021, the Borg is making lemonade by focusing on an online-only version of Black Rock City this coming August.    Read more...
      More about Burning Man, Tech, Web Culture, and Live EventsView the full article
      • 0 replies
    • Post in What Are You Listening To?
      Post in What Are You Listening To?
    • Post in What Are You Listening To?
      Post in What Are You Listening To?
    • Post in What Are You Listening To?
      Post in What Are You Listening To?
    • Post in What Are You Listening To?
      Post in What Are You Listening To?
×
×
  • Create New...