Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands for deals, including promoted items.
Forum Thread
Amazon Discounts, Deals and Coupon Codes

Since When Have Amazon Digital MP3s Been in 256k VBR and not 320k CBR Like the Industry Standard

1,444 336 August 3, 2016 at 05:04 PM Amazon
Is this really how they shaved 11 cents off the industry standard of 99 cents for full quality paid for music ?

After noticing a few songs I bought were in 256 ... I went on chat to see what gives ... This is their official response.

CBR = Constant Bitrate (Still Not Lossless But Pretty Close)
VBR = Variable Bitrate (Definitely NOT Lossless ... Think How "Full Quality" Mp3s Sounded in the Napster days)


"Many of Amazon Music MP3 files are recorded at a variable bit rate, which may cause your media player to report a bit rate different from 256Kbps. We encode our MP3 files using variable bit rates for maximum audio quality and smaller file sizes, aiming at an average of 256 kilobits per second (kbps). Using a variable bit rate allows us to allocate a higher bit rate to the more complex sections of music files while using a smaller bit rate for the less complex sections. We then calculate an average bit rate for the entire file that represents the overall sound quality."


"Some Amazon Digital Music content is encoded using a constant bit rate of 256 kbps. This content will have the same excellent audio quality and a slightly larger file size."

I got refunded on the songs I bought and will get them off another service but this really is a bad move for Amazon. All of this to save what ... an extra 2 and a half megs per file in storage and bandwidth. Also how do they have the freedom to re-encode the labels submission and pass along the work (when it technically is a degraded product) just to save bandwidth that we are paying for anyway ? It's being served up by AWS anyway ... Amazon doesn't have unlimited bandwidth ?

This is enough for me to stop using them since they didn't disclose this anyway apparent. Even my re-downloads of older songs are now in 256k when my originals are still 320k.
About the OP
Joined Dec 2008 L6: Expert
336 Reputation Points
66 Deals Posted
120 Votes Submitted
1,444 Comments Posted
Don't have Amazon Prime? Students can get a free 6-Month Amazon Prime trial with free 2-day shipping, unlimited video streaming & more. If you're not a student, there's also a free 1-Month Amazon Prime trial available. You can also earn cash back rewards on Amazon and Whole Foods purchases with the Amazon Prime Visa credit card. Read our review to see if it’s the right card for you.

Your comment cannot be blank.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Dec 2008
The Po-Po is here.
> bubble2 3,398 Posts
149 Reputation
genghiskhan
08-03-2016 at 08:48 PM.
08-03-2016 at 08:48 PM.
What your torrents site busted?

Quote from Xplic1T :
Is this really how they shaved 11 cents off the industry standard of 99 cents for full quality paid for music ?

After noticing a few songs I bought were in 256 ... I went on chat to see what gives ... This is their official response.

CBR = Constant Bitrate (Still Not Lossless But Pretty Close)
VBR = Variable Bitrate (Definitely NOT Lossless ... Think How "Full Quality" Mp3s Sounded in the Napster days)


"Many of Amazon Music MP3 files are recorded at a variable bit rate, which may cause your media player to report a bit rate different from 256Kbps. We encode our MP3 files using variable bit rates for maximum audio quality and smaller file sizes, aiming at an average of 256 kilobits per second (kbps). Using a variable bit rate allows us to allocate a higher bit rate to the more complex sections of music files while using a smaller bit rate for the less complex sections. We then calculate an average bit rate for the entire file that represents the overall sound quality."


"Some Amazon Digital Music content is encoded using a constant bit rate of 256 kbps. This content will have the same excellent audio quality and a slightly larger file size."

I got refunded on the songs I bought and will get them off another service but this really is a bad move for Amazon. All of this to save what ... an extra 2 and a half megs per file in storage and bandwidth. Also how do they have the freedom to re-encode the labels submission and pass along the work (when it technically is a degraded product) just to save bandwidth that we are paying for anyway ? It's being served up by AWS anyway ... Amazon doesn't have unlimited bandwidth ?

This is enough for me to stop using them since they didn't disclose this anyway apparent. Even my re-downloads of older songs are now in 256k when my originals are still 320k.
qplr.
Reply
Last edited by genghiskhan August 3, 2016 at 08:49 PM.
Joined Aug 2003
L9: Master
> bubble2 4,298 Posts
360 Reputation
fsyowad
08-03-2016 at 09:04 PM.
08-03-2016 at 09:04 PM.
I don't think the music industry really wants you EVER owning a digital copy of anything in it's best resolution.

What else will they ever have to sell you? Errr I mean loan you?

There is some hope on the horizon though if MQA ever is widely adapted.

http://www.whathifi.com/advice/mq...you-get-it
Reply
Last edited by fsyowad August 3, 2016 at 09:06 PM.
Joined Jul 2005
killroy was here
> bubble2 12,166 Posts
1,384 Reputation
dayv
08-05-2016 at 11:45 AM.
08-05-2016 at 11:45 AM.
Quote from genghiskhan :
What your torrents site busted?



qplr.
LEO recommends torrenting.
Reply
Page 1 of 1
Start the Conversation
 
Link Copied

The link has been copied to the clipboard.