Bluetooth music


Free Download Mp4Gain
picture

Bluetooth music

Bluetooth Music

Understanding wireless audio codecs

Bluetooth Music

Wireless accessories are gaining popularity. How to listen to your favorite music via Bluetooth? We will tell you about it in this article
AND
Bluetooth Music: Understanding Wireless Audio Codecs
In recent years, wireless headphones have become widespread, but lovers of high-quality sound are in no rush to ditch the cables. The reason is that audio transmission over a radio channel requires encoding with a special algorithm – a codec, since the bandwidth of the Bluetooth channel is very limited. The basic codecs are not demanding on the processing power of the source, but they noticeably spoil the audio stream and cannot provide the level of Hi-Res audio. With the development of technology, high-quality codecs have appeared, including: aptX, aptX HD, and LDAC.

Digital sound theory
Bluetooth Music: Understanding Wireless Audio Codecs
The quality of digital sound is determined by several parameters, first of all, the sampling frequency, that is, the sampling frequency of analog sound. The unit of measurement is Hertz (Hz), that is, the number of samples per second. The more, the closer the encoded sound is to the original signal.

Bit depth determines the encoding precision of each section determined by the sample rate. Larger values ​​provide greater precision, but the amount of data required increases E

The bit rate depends on the above parameters and characterizes the flow required to encode and transmit sound through the channel per unit of time. The bit rate depends on the degree of compression of the signal and indirectly determines the quality of the sound. Measured in bits per second (bps).

Bluetooth Music: Understanding Wireless Audio Codecs
It is worth remembering that to activate the codec, its bidirectional support is required from the source and the playback device, that is, for example, headphones and a smartphone. Otherwise, a lower quality algorithm will be selected for audio streaming. The digital audio standard is CD, which uses a sampling rate of 44100 Hz at 16 bits, uncompressed, and two channels provide a bit rate of 1411 kbps.

Subband coding
SBC or subband encoding is a lossy efficient Bluetooth audio codec. SBC appeared long before the proliferation of powerful smartphones, and its main task is to reduce the computational burden of encoding and decoding audio. Other challenges are economic and stable transmission in all conditions. The algorithm is crude and based on the imperfection of the human ear. Frequency ranges that are indistinguishable across the entire audio path are cut off and not encoded. The bit rate is 328 kbps at a 48 kHz sampling rate and 16 bit depth, which is comparable to MP3, but the final quality is significantly lower.

Bluetooth Music: Understanding Wireless Audio Codecs
The SBC codec is the basic codec for streaming audio via Bluetooth and is compatible with all devices. The quality in a stretch is sufficient for listening to MP3 and AAC formats, as well as for streaming services like Google Play Music and Apple Music.

Advanced audio coding
Advanced Audio Coding or AAC – Further development of technology with better sound quality at a lower bit rate. The effect is achieved by complex algorithms that require high computing power, which is not a problem for modern devices.

Bluetooth Music: Understanding Wireless Audio Codecs
It has spread in the technique of Apple, which needs no introduction. Admittedly, there are no more advanced algorithms in gadgets from the Cupertino company. Advanced third-party audio devices generally support AAC, but they also support the more advanced aptX codecs, aptX HD, and LDAC, which are described below.


Free Download Mp4Gain
picture


Mp4Gain Main Window
picture


Mp4Gain Features
picture


Free Download Mp4Gain
picture

Myths of Digital Music Part 5

Myths of Digital Music Part 5

digital music

Myth 1

digital music

The wider the spectrum, the better the recording (over spectrograms, auCDtect and frequency range)
Today in forums, unfortunately, it is very common to measure the quality of a track with a “ruler in the spectrogram”. Obviously, for the simplicity of this method. But, as practice shows, in reality everything is much more complicated.

And the point is this. The spectrogram visually demonstrates the distribution of signal power at frequencies, but cannot give a complete picture of the sound of the recording, the presence of distortions and compression artifacts in it. That is, in fact, all that can be determined from the spectrogram is the frequency range (and partially, the density of the spectrum in the HF region). That is, in the best case, by analyzing the spectrogram, you can identify the upconversion. The comparison of the spectrograms of the tracks obtained by encoding several encoders with the original is absolutely absurd. Yes, you can identify differences in the spectrum, but determining whether (and to what extent) they will be perceived by the human ear is almost impossible. We must not forget that the task of lossy encoding is to provide a result that the human ear cannot distinguish from the original (not with the naked eye).

The same applies to evaluating the encoding quality by analyzing the output tracks with the auCDtect program (Audiochecker, auCDtect Task Manager, Tau Analyzer, fooCDtect are just shells for the one-of-a-kind auCDtect console program). The auCDtect algorithm also analyzes the frequency range and only allows you to determine (with a certain degree of probability) whether MPEG compression was applied in any of the encoding stages. The algorithm is designed for MP3, so it is easy to “cheat” with the Vorbis, AAC and Musepack codecs, so even if the program writes “100% CDDA”, it does not mean that the encoded audio is 100% identical to the original. .

And going straight back to the specters. Also popular is the desire of some “enthusiasts” to turn off the low pass filter on the LAME encoder at all costs. There is a lack of understanding of coding and psychoacoustic principles. First, the encoder cuts the high frequencies for one purpose: to save data and use it to encode the most audible frequency range. The extended frequency range can be fatal to overall sound quality and cause audible coding artifacts. Also, turning off the cutoff at 20 kHz is generally not justified, as a person simply does not hear the higher frequencies.

There is a kind of “magic” EQ preset that can significantly enhance the sound.
This is not entirely true, in the first place, because each configuration taken separately (headphones, acoustics, sound card) has its own parameters (in particular, its amplitude-frequency characteristic). And therefore each configuration must have its own unique approach. Simply put, such an EQ preset exists, but it is different for different settings. Its essence lies in adjusting the frequency response of the path, that is, in “leveling out” unwanted voltage dips and surges.

Also, among people who are far from direct work with sound, it is very popular to set the graphic equalizer “with a tick”, which actually represents an increase in the level of the low and high frequency components, but at the same Time leads to muffled vocals and instruments, whose sound spectrum is in the mid-range region.

Before converting music to another format, you must “unzip” it to WAV
I would like to point out right away that WAV stands for PCM (pulse code modulation) data in a WAVE container (file with extension * .wav). This data is nothing more than a sequence of bits (zeros and ones) in groups of 16, 24 or 32 (depending on the bit depth), each of which is a binary code of the corresponding sample width (for For example, for 16 bits in decimal notation (these are values ​​from -32768 to +32768).

So the fact is that any sound processor, be it a filter or an encoder, generally works only with these values, that is, only with uncompressed data. This means that to convert audio from, say, FLAC to APE, you just need to decode FLAC to PCM first and then encode PCM to APE. It’s like repackaging files from ZIP to RAR, you need to unzip the ZIP first.

However, if you’re using a converter or just an advanced console encoder, intermediate to PCM conversion happens on the fly, sometimes even without writing to a temporary WAV file.

Myths of Digital Music Part 4

Myths of Digital Music Part 4

digital music

Myth 1

digital music

Licensed Audio CDs Sound Better Than Your Copies
If during the copy there were no read / write errors (fatal) and the optical drive of the device on which the copy will be played has no problem with its reading, then this statement is wrong and easily refutable.

Myth 2

Stereo encoding mode offers better quality than Joint Stereo
This misconception mainly refers to LAME MP3, as all modern encoders (AAC, Vorbis, Musepack) use only Joint Stereo mode (and this already says something)

For starters, it’s worth mentioning that the Joint Stereo mode is used successfully with lossless compression. Its essence lies in the fact that the signal before encoding is decomposed into the sum of the left and right channels (Mid) and their difference (Side), and then these signals are encoded separately. At the limit (for the same information on the right and left channels) you get twice the data savings. And since the information in the left and right channels is quite similar in most music, this method is very effective and allows you to significantly increase the compression ratio.

In loss, the principle is the same. But here, in constant bitrate mode, the quality of fragments with similar information on two channels will increase (at the limit, it will double), and for VBR mode, in such places, the bitrate will simply decrease ( don’t forget that the main task of VBR mode is to stably maintain the given encoding quality, using the lowest possible bit rate). Since the sum of the channels is given priority (in the bit allocation) during lossy encoding to avoid degradation of the stereo panorama, dynamic switching between Joint Stereo (Mid / Side) frame-based stereo modes and normal (Left / Right) is used. By the way, the reason for this deception was the imperfection of the switching algorithm in previous versions of LAME, as well as the presence of the Forced Joint mode, in which there is no automatic switching.

Myths of Digital Music Part 3

Myths of Digital Music Part 3

digital music

Myth 1

digital music

Different software players sound different (eg foobar2000 is better than Winamp, etc.)
To understand why this is not the case, you need to understand what a software player is. In fact, it is a decoder, drivers (optional), an output plugin (to one of the interfaces: ASIO, DirectSound, WASAPI. Etc.) and of course the GUI (graphical user interface). Since the decoder in 99.9% of cases works according to the standard algorithm, and the output plug-in is just a part of the program that transmits a stream to the sound card through one of the interfaces, the reason for differences can only be manipulative. But the thing is, the drivers are usually disabled by default (or should be disabled, since the main thing for a good player is to be able to transmit the sound in its “original” form). As a result, only possibilities can be compared here. processing and output, which, by the way, is often unnecessary. But even if there is such a need, this is already a comparison of handlers, not players.

Here I would also like to mention my article on how to configure sound output on a computer and perhaps annoy users who admire the “colossal” changes in sound after the configuration described in it; in 95% of cases, this is self-hypnosis (except, of course, when during setup some “enhancer” or other driver was turned off and messed up the whole picture). Unfortunately, the gains from all of these tweaks with ReplayGain, resamplers, and limiters are slim. Read more in the article “One more time about the sad truth: where does good sound really come from?” …

Myth 2

Different versions of drivers sound different

This statement is based on a banal ignorance of the principles of sound cards. A driver is software necessary for the effective interaction of a device with the operating system, and generally also provides a graphical user interface to control the device, its settings, etc. A sound card driver ensures that the sound card is recognized as a Windows sound device. , informs the operating system of supported formats, provides uncompressed PCM stream transfer (in most cases) to the card, and also gives access to settings. Also, in the case of software processing (by means of the CPU), the controller can contain multiple DSPs (controllers). So, with effects and processing turned off in the first place, if the driver doesn’t provide accurate PCM transfer to the card, this is considered a fatal error. critical error. And it happens extremely rare. On the other hand, the differences between the controllers can be in the updating of the processing algorithms (resamplers, effects), although this does not happen often either. Also, effects and any controller processing should be excluded for maximum quality.

Therefore, driver updates are mainly focused on improving stability and fixing handling errors. In our case, neither one nor the other affects the playback quality, so in 999 cases out of 1000 the driver does not affect the sound.

Myths of Digital Music Part 2

Myths of Digital Music Part 2

digital music

DVD-Audio sounds better than Audio CD (24-bit vs. 16, 96 kHz vs. 44.1, etc.)

digital music

Unfortunately, people generally only look at numbers and rarely think about the impact of a particular parameter on objective quality.

Let’s first consider the bit depth. This parameter is only responsible for the dynamic range, that is, the difference between the lowest and highest sounds (in dB). In digital audio, the maximum level is 0 dBFS (FS – full scale), and the minimum is limited by the noise level, that is, in fact, the dynamic range in absolute value is equal to the noise level. For 16-bit audio, the dynamic range is calculated as 20 × log 10 2 16, which is 96.33 wB. The dynamic range of a symphony orchestra is up to 75 dB (mainly around 40-50 dB).

Now let’s imagine the actual conditions. The noise level in the room is about 40 dB (do not forget that dB is a relative value. In this case, the hearing threshold is taken as 0 dB), the maximum volume of music reaches 110 dB (so that no discomfort) – we get a difference of 70 dB. So it turns out that a dynamic range of more than 70 dB in this case is simply useless. That is, at a higher range, loud sounds will reach the pain threshold or soft sounds will be absorbed by the surrounding noise. It is very difficult to achieve an ambient noise level of less than 15 dB (since the volume of human breath and other noises caused by human physiology is at this level), as a result, a range of 95 dB for listening music is completely sufficient.

But there is a “but” here. If you generate a clean tone with a frequency of, for example, 1 kHz and a level of -60 dBFS with a 16-bit quantization depth, and then you listen to it and compare it to the same signal, but generated in 24-bit format , you will hear the differences. The reason lies in the distortion of the waveform and the appearance of parasitic harmonics. But to eliminate this unpleasant effect, fortunately, there are Dithering and Noise Shaping technologies.

Now about the sample rate (sample rate, sample rate). This parameter is responsible for the time sampling rate and directly affects the maximum frequency of the signal that can be described by this audio representation. According to Kotelnikov’s theorem, it is equal to half the sampling frequency. That is, for a typical sampling frequency of 44100 Hz, the maximum frequency of the signal components is 22050 Hz. The maximum frequency. that is perceived by the human ear, just above 20,000 Hz (and even then, at birth; as we age, the threshold drops to 16,000 Hz).

Myths of digital music

Myths of digital music

digital music

Lossy codecs (MP3 and others) can cope with modern electronic music, but cannot efficiently encode classical (academic), live and instrumental music.

digital music

The “irony of fate” here is that everything is actually the exact opposite. As you know, academic music in the vast majority of cases follows melodic and harmonic principles, as well as instrumental composition. From a mathematical point of view, this leads to a relatively simple harmonic composition of the music. So the predominance of consonances produces fewer side harmonics: for example, for the fifth (the interval in which the fundamental frequencies of two sounds differ by one and a half times), each second harmonic will be common for two sounds, for a fourth, where the frequencies differ by one third, every third, etc. Furthermore, the presence of fixed frequency ratios, due to the use of equal temperament, also simplifies the spectral composition of classical music.

The factors listed above lead to the fact that classical music is much easier to compress, mainly in a purely mathematical way. If you remember, mathematical compression works by removing redundancy (describing similar pieces of information using fewer bits), as well as predicting (so-called predictors predict the behavior of the signal, and then only the deviation of the actual signal from the predicted one is encoded; the more exactly they match, fewer bits are needed for encoding). In this case, relatively simple spectral composition and harmonicity lead to high redundancy, the removal of which provides a significant degree of compression, and a small number of bursts and noise components (which are random and unpredictable signals) leads to good predictability. mathematics the vast majority of information. Not to mention the relatively low average loudness of classic tracks and the frequent gaps of silence, which require virtually no information to encode. As a result, we can compress without loss, for example,

So, first of all, the fact is that the mathematical compression underlying lossless encoding is also one of the stages of lossy encoding (read Understanding MP3 encoding). And secondly, since lossy uses the Fourier transform (decomposition of the signal into harmonics), the simplicity of the spectral composition even makes the encoder’s job twice as easy. As a result, when comparing the original and encoded sample of classical music in a blind test, we are surprised to find that we cannot find any difference, even at a relatively low bit rate. And the funny thing is that when we start to completely lower the encoding bit rate, the first thing that detects the difference is the background noise in the recording.

As for electronic music, encoders have a hard time: noise components have minimal redundancy and, along with jerky jumps (some sawtooth pulses), are extremely unpredictable signals (for encoders that are “sharp “by natural sounds that behave completely differently), the direct and inverse Fourier transform with the rejection of individual harmonics by the psychoacoustic model inevitably produces pre and post echo effects, the audibility of which is not always easy to evaluate for the encoder … Add to this a high level of HF Components, and you get a lot of killer samples that even the most advanced encoders can’t handle at medium-low bit rates – oddly enough, it’s somewhere between the electronic music.

Also amusing are the opinions of “experienced listeners” and musicians, who, with a complete misunderstanding of the principles of lossy encoding, begin to claim that they hear how the instruments in music, after encoding, begin to falsify, the frequencies float, etc. perhaps it would still be true for detonating antediluvian cassette players, but in digital audio everything is exact: the frequency component remains or is discarded, there is simply no need to change the key.

Also: a person’s ear for music does not at all mean that they have good frequency hearing (for example, the ability to perceive frequencies> 16 kHz, which decreases with age) and does not make it easier for them to search for encoding artifacts at a loss. Since distortion has a very specific character and requires the expertise of blindly comparing lossy audio, you need to know

The higher the bit rate, the better the track?

The higher the bit rate, the better the track?

bit rate

This is not always the case.

bit rate

For starters, let me remind you what bitrate t (bitrate, instead of bitraid). In fact, this is the data rate in kilobits per second during playback. That is, if we take the size of the track in kilobits and divide it by its duration in seconds, we get its bit rate, the call. File-based bitrate (FBR), usually not too different from the bitrate of the audio stream (the reason for the differences is the presence of metadata on the track: tags, “embedded” images, etc.) .

Now let’s take an example: the uncompressed PCM audio bit rate recorded on a normal audio CD is calculated as follows: 2 (channels) × 16 (bits per sample) × 44100 (samples per second) = 1411200 (bps ) = 1411.2 kbps. .. Now let’s take and compress the track with any lossless codec (“lossless” – “lossless”, that is, one that does not lead to information loss), for example, the FLAC codec. As a result, we will get a lower bit rate than the original, but the quality will remain unchanged; here is your first rebuttal.

Something else is worth adding here. The lossless compression output bitrate can be very different (but is generally lower than uncompressed audio); It depends on the complexity of the compressed signal, or rather on data redundancy. So simpler signals will compress better (ie we have smaller file size for the same duration => lower bitrate), and more complex signals will be worse. That’s why lossless classical music has a lower bitrate than, say, rock. But it must be emphasized that the bit rate here is in no way an indicator of the quality of the sound material.

Now let’s talk about lossy compression. First of all, you need to understand that there are many different encoders and formats, and even within the same format, the encoding quality for different encoders can differ (for example, QuickTime AAC encodes much better than outdated FAAC), not to mention the superiority of modern formats (OGG Vorbis, AAC, Opus) on MP3. Simply put, from two identical tracks encoded by different encoders with the same bit rate, some will sound better and some will sound worse.

Also, there is upconversion. That is, you can take a track in MP3 format with 96 kbps bit rate and convert it to 320 kbps MP3. Not only will the quality not improve (after all, data lost during the previous 96kbps encoding cannot be returned), it will even get worse. It is worth noting that at each lossy encoding stage (at any bit rate and any encoder) a certain amount of distortion is introduced into the audio.

And even more. There is one more nuance. If, say, the bit rate of an audio stream is 320 kbps, this does not mean that the 320 kbps was spent encoding that very second. This is typical for constant bit rate encoding and for those cases where a person, hoping for maximum quality, forces a constant bit rate too high (for example, setting CBR to 512 kbps for Nero AAC ). As you know, the number of bits assigned to a particular frame is regulated by the psychoacoustic model. But in case the allocated amount is much lower than the set bitrate, even the bit deposit is not saved (for terms see the article “What is CBR, ABR, VBR?”) – as a result, we get useless “zero bits” that simply “wrap up” the frame size to the desired one (that is, increase the size of the stream to the specified size). By the way, this is easy to check: compress the resulting file with a filing cabinet (preferably 7z) and look at the compression ratio – the more, the more zero bits (as they lead to redundancy), the more space wasted.

Bit rate as a characteristic of digital video and audio

Bit rate as a characteristic of digital video and audio

bit rate

Concept

bit rate

Bitrate: literally, the information bit rate. It is common to use the bit rate when measuring the effective information transmission rate through the channel, that is, the “payload” transmission rate (in addition to that, the channel can transmit service information, for example symbols start and stop for asynchronous transmission or control symbols for redundant coding). The baud rate, which takes into account the total bandwidth of the channel, is measured in baud.

Bit rate is the number of units of information required to store (transmit) one second of a stream of data (generally audio and video files). It is generally measured in ‘kbps’, kilobits per second.

The term bit rate is used in two basic meanings
: channel or device characteristic: the maximum number of bits that can be transmitted per unit of time.
– The amount of data stream transmitted in real time (the minimum channel size that this stream can pass through without delay).
– A special case is the compressed video or audio bit rate.
Bit rate is expressed in bits per second (bit / s, bps), as well as values ​​derived with the prefixes kilo, mega, etc.

The term bitrate (along with subjective quality criteria) is often used as a characteristic to evaluate the performance of lossy compression algorithms.

Bitrate characterizes both the density of the information package and its quality. For example, out of two MP3 files compressed with different bit rates, a file with a higher bit rate will have higher sound quality (close to the original). At the same time, a file of a different format, with the same bit rate, can offer both better and worse sound quality.

On audio CDs, information is losslessly encoded at a constant 1407 kbps bit rate.

The MP3 format allows encoding audio information with constant or variable bitrate from 32 to 320 kbps, that is, they provide five times the compression compared to CD.

Bitrate and its calculation Bit rate (bit rate) Part 3

Bitrate and its calculation Bit rate (bit rate) Part 3

bit rate

coding.

bit rate

Codecs and Media Containers

Since 2014, the most common high definition video format is HD (Full HD), with a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels and a screen aspect ratio of 16 x 9. (This format is compatible with most modern LCD and plasma televisions, but not all are capable of providing a high quality picture.
The fact is that most of these televisions have a lower screen resolution than is necessary for viewing in Full HD, for example 1280×720. The HD format has varieties: 1080i and 1080p. As with other formats, the letters i and p represent progressively scanned or interlaced images.

But, unlike the usual PAL and NTSC formats, here with interlaced scanning the frame rate is 60 and with progressive scanning 50 frames per second. This is a standard, you can stick to it, but you can work around it too. The fact is that today a full HD format can only be played on a computer, there are no special devices (players) to watch it (HD DVD (gradually dying) and Blu-Ray disc players do not provide Full HD quality, but more on that later), therefore full compliance with the rules is no longer as important. The next most common high definition video quality and format is HDV, with a screen resolution of 1440 x 1080, but also with a 16×9 aspect ratio. This ratio is achieved by “stretching the pixels” horizontally, from 1440 to 1920. Therefore, for a Full HDV display, a FullHD television with a screen resolution of 1920×1080 is also required. Of course, the video quality in HDV format is lower than HD, but still, HDV format is quite common among users. The reason is that the HDV format was invented before HD, and even before the latter came out, a lot of video equipment was developed and released that only supports 1440×1080. High definition movies, generally recorded on HD DVD and Blu-Ray discs, also have an HDV resolution of 1440 x 1080. Even before the advent of HDV and HD, the 720p “high definition” format appeared. The resolution is 1280×720, the aspect ratio is 16×9. It is essentially a transitional format, from standard PAL to HDV and HD. The world’s first “high definition” hobby camcorder produced by JVC recorded at 720p. Even earlier, the PAL television format appeared in 720×576 resolution with 50 Hz interlaced scan. Now, this format is used in digital and satellite television (not HD). Now (2014-2017) I use mp4 format: mp4 – Full HD – 1920 x 1280, 16×9 variable bit rate 10 – 15 mbps for home viewing on 64 inch Full HD TV, this is enough. mp4 – HD – 1280 x 720, 16×9, variable bit rate 4-6 mbps. – if you need to save disk space, or if quality doesn’t really matter (or if you need to speed up rendering).
Источник: https://vseprost.ru/vybor-bitrejta-dlya-zapisi-multimedia.html

Bitrate and its calculation Bit rate (bit rate) Part 2

Bitrate and its calculation Bit rate (bit rate) Part 2

bit rate

Let’s go back to the DVD story for a moment.

bit rate

When the first analog-to-digital converters appeared in capture card form, it was claimed that 60 minutes of video could be put on a DVD-R with no loss of quality. In the claimed presentation data of the DVD format, the maximum bit rate of the multiplexed stream is 9.8 Mbit / s. When DVD recorders appeared that were capable of digitizing an analog signal in high quality, it was said that the recorder could fit up to 125 minutes on a disc without losing quality and up to 90 minutes if you wanted to save sound in PCM format.

We test, we verify, we write from both disk and videotapes; there is no visual difference even during pauses and in frame by frame mode (if the recorder is good). The bit rate that the recorders give to the output of the digitized image is 9000 Kbps and sometimes a little more. Why is the math not the same as the DVD burner result?

Probably because we do the calculation for a constant bit rate, and the recorders can already digitize video with a variable bit rate and have appropriate compression algorithms. By setting the upper limit of the bit rate at 9000 Kbps, you can achieve a good picture in video segments with dynamic actions, while in other parts of the same video the value of the bit rate can reach 2000 Kbps. noticed that when you record a video or a photo with a digital camera, the files have different sizes? Once the initial parameter is set, the codec itself chooses the value of the bit rate. Optimal bit rate for DVD video Considering the fact that up to 120 minutes of video can be recorded on DVD-R without quality loss, we ask ourselves: how to do this? Let’s consider 2 ways: 1. If you are using a DVD burner, set it to “lossless quality” mode and set to record. If your video is 60 minutes long, the recorder will not stretch it by 4. 36GB and it will only take up half the free space. 2. If you use a capture card or TV tuner, first capture as described here and then compress the resulting file with a quality program with modern codecs and multiple passes (at least the same Freemake Video Converter) at the speed of dvd5 for 120 minutes (don’t forget the menu). Consider an option when your video is short and you are not going to burn it to DVD-ROM or if you want to burn multiple MPEG-2 files to disc at once without losing quality. Below is a table calculated mathematically on the basis that you can fit 120 minutes of video on 4464MB of disk space (no menus). There are a few things to keep in mind: The table is written for MPEG-2 files. The table is not written for previously compressed videos. These values ​​do not include a menu. Using different programs, you can get different results. The values ​​in the table may vary depending on the content of the video. If the program has a bit rate option then you need to set “VBR” (variable). The values ​​in the table are based on “lossless compression”. In this article, “lossless compression” refers to the viewing experience. In fact, in the analytical version, the word “compression” already denotes a loss of quality.
Источник: https://vseprost.ru/vybor-bitrejta-dlya-zapisi-multimedia.html