Talk:Bit rate

message: could someone add bitrate info for MPEG? and explain that same bitrates dont have to mean same quality - cd has bitrate of 174kbytes/s, encoded to MusePack or OggVorbis could have almost the same quality in 1/10 size. Similar with mpeg vs divx.
could someone explain what bitrate means in terms of audio recordings? -- Tarquin 13:18, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The bitrate is AOK in kbit/s. After all, it's the bitrate, not the byterate. An audio CD's uncompressed PCM bitrate is some 1.4 Mbit/s or 176.4 kB/s. --Zac67 (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  MPEG 

message: Could someone expand the page to include information on the bitrates of ogg vorbis and other formats? --Funnykidrian 02:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ogg Vorbis and other formats

message: I think there is a quite bad mixup here. These bandwidth conversion links only offer datarate conversions!
the bandwith - datarate relationship depends on the modulation ... 
Unfortunately this inaccuracy of definitions is all over these articles here!
Mathematically, for a given bandwidth; sampling at 2-times that bandwidth is the maximum sample-rate needed, beyond that no extra information is being recorded. In order to understand why this is you have to understand the mathematics of working in the frequency domain(rather than time domain), but essentially, a 22khz bandwidth signal (such as a sound signal which is human-hearable, humans can only hear between about 20Hz and 22Khz, which is why CDs are sampled at 44.1Khz) sampling beyond 44Khz is useless. Of course, this is given that the sampling being done is 'ideal' mathematically.(In addition, any particular individual might be able to hear beyond 22Khz. However, this begs the question; what musician is intentionally producing sounds above 22Khz??) The extra .1Khz(100Hz) is more than enough to account for the non-idealities of current digital sampler technology.
* sampling beyond 44Khz is useless
** Except for reducing quantization noise, phase distortion, and aliasing, providing a guard band...
* what musician is intentionally producing sounds above 22Khz
** All of them.  Harmonics extend to infinite frequency, though the amplitudes become negligible.
* The extra .1Khz(100Hz) is more than enough to account for the non-idealities of current digital sampler technology.
** I'm not sure about that. — Omegatron 05:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bandwidth vs. datarate 

message: The (currently six) bit rate articles need work.  The bit and byte rates, for instance:
* kbit/s (1000 bits)
* kbyte/s (1000 bytes = 8000 bits)
are currently clumped into the same kilobit per second article, which is suboptimal (though they aren't really worthy splitting into two articles I don't think).  Maybe rename to Kilo- bit rates or something?  Nah.  That sounds even worse...
Also, none of the articles are consistent in formatting or information presented anyway.  Maybe these should all be merged into bit rate?  It was already decided to keep kilobit, etc. separate, but maybe the rates will never be big enough for their own articles. — Omegatron 05:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging the little bit rate articles? 

message: If one is playing music (or speech for that matter) at any given bitrate, is there any point in recording it at a higher rate? Also, if the playing bitrate varies, should one record using a constant bitrate setting or a variable one? 87.74.35.221 19:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's lossy audio that's being played back, any non-lossless recording will result in objectively worse quality. Whether this is noticable with your ears is another problem altogether. --KJ 18:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Transcoding questions

message: IEEE provides a definite guide on IEEE units and SI prefixes: http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs_iportals/iportals/publications/authors/transjnl/auinfo07.pdf Wikipedia should refer to the correct usage of units. Due to marketing purposes, people tend to write and talk about "kbit/s", "kbps" etc. That's all wrong. To avoid confustion and to provide a solid, profund and reliable system of units that is based on international conventions and scientific relevance, Wikipedia should use "b" for bit as on page A1 in http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs_iportals/iportals/publications/authors/transjnl/auinfo07.pdf and "b/s" for "bit per second", "kb/s" for "1000 bit per second" etc.
Within Wikipedia there should be a clear and precise reference to the academic world and its well developed units. Additional explanations may explain why marketing language may use different abbreviations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.235.169.25 (talk) 23:22, August 24, 2007 (UTC) 
===Note there is no SI unit for "bit per second".===
Baud can be used, but from the Baud page, it only applies to acoustic modems, LAN standards APPARENTLY expressing the data rate rather than the gross bit rate.  But I, or they (on that page), could be wrong.Jabberwoch (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academia and Science vs. Marketing, Nonsense and Slang 

message: Baud can be used, but from the Baud page, it only applies to acoustic modems, LAN standards APPARENTLY expressing the data rate rather than the gross bit rate.  But I, or they (on that page), could be wrong.Jabberwoch (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Note there is no SI unit for "bit per second".

message: The article says:
For technical reasons (hardware/software protocols, overheads, encoding schemes, etc.) the actual bitrates used by some of the compared-to devices may be significantly higher than what is listed above.
It then goes on to list CD audio as 1.4 Mbit/s, implying that this is the physical-layer bit rate.  However this is actually the audio bit rate (44100 * 2 * 16 = 1.411200e6).  Can we clarify what this section is talking about? Oli Filth 11:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Bitrates in multimedia" discrepancy 

message: IMO this page (or the appropriate subpage) should have conversion tables for common bitrates to byterates as most endusers aren't too familiar about the difference. - G3, 15:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion tables 

message: I've proposed that all the articles like megabit per second be merged into this article.  There is nothing about these units that they deserve their own articles.
However, we should provide a list of each unit on this page, with definitions and anchor links, so the redirects can link directly to the unit's definition and the units can be linked in articles. — Omegatron 00:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm going to redirect, but also include anything that's not in this article, and maintain the links with anchor tags.  Since this has been up almost a month with no complaints, I'm going to do it. — Omegatron 23:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, now I'm looking at this, and it's not as straightforward as I thought.  :-)  The best way to present the different units would be a table, but that doesn't lend itself to individual anchor tags.  I guess a Definitions section with a table and redirecting the little articles to that section would work.  I'll build the table here first. — Omegatron 00:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Merge Seems like a good idea to me. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② talk 21:06, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I vote yes on merging all the "---bit_per_second" articles with this one and redirecting them all here. I also like Omegatron's proposed table. -- CWesling 02:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  I also support this.  All the *bit/s article are redundant, since the conversions are obvious, especially with the Bit rate infobox (which should be kept). Superm401 - Talk 13:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of bit/s articles 

message: A merge of the bit rate article, the data transfer rate article and others is discussed in the talk page of the latter page. Mange01 00:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also in favor of this merger. Merge 'em all! 8-) -- CWesling 02:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of several *rate articles 

message: I think that it's important that the bitrate vs. size of file comparison be added and which (whether larger bitrate, larger file size or larger bitrate, smaller file size) can be used to optimize performance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jotsko (talk • contribs).
:Bit rate is file size, more or less. Bit rate is file size divided by play time, so if play time is the same and the bit rate is the same, then by definition, the file size will be the same as well. --Kjoonlee 21:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bitrate vs. Size of File 

message: It's great that you're all trying to make wikipedia look nice but all those "it has been suggested that x be merged into this article" banners look atrocious. Either merge them or take the banners down, for goodness sake!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.234.65 (talk) 00:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Does anyone know which statements in this article come from this standard?  If not, can we remove the  usage?  This template is one of my least favourites on WP, because it seems to be just slapped on articles arbitrarily!  Oli Filth(talk) 18:42, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is public-domain material so WP:ATTRIBUTION requirements are light. I've removed it from the article. See Template_talk:FOLDOC#Readers_don't_care_about_this! for recent discussion. Our mentioning it here should be adequate. ~Kvng (talk) 18:03, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Federal Standard 1037C 

message: I suggest that the following comparison table is added to the article, after it has been extended with accurate figures. Please add more information to it.
Mange01 (talk) 23:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for comparison table of baud rate, gross bit rate and net bit rate for common technologies 

message: The article uses Ethernet 100Base-TX as an example of a technology that has a same gross and net bitrate. But 100Base-TX is using 4B5B encoding; therefore, its gross bitrate is 125 Mbps.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.92.145.132 (talk) 10:52, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is addressed. Mange01 (talk) 20:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethernet gross and net bitrate 

message: A  template was added without motivation. Please be more specific and replace it by  templates wherever appropriate. Currently the article has 12 sources, and only one  template. Mange01 (talk) 20:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No answer for 6 months. I added a few sources and removed the template. Please be more specific. Mange01 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is 12 sources not enough?

message: Can we move the multimedia part into a separate article? At least the list of bit rates. For example Bit rate in multimedia or Multimedia encoding bit rate, or list of multimedia format bit rates or something like that? This article still can sumarize the multimedia aspects but skip the details. See also Comparison of container formats.  Mange01 (talk) 17:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree  Sounds like it would make the article more readable and still provide the details for those who want it. § Music Sorter § (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split? Separate list of Multimedia bit rates? 

message: What is bitrate crash test (Crash test)?---90.173.198.163 (talk) 08:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bitrate Crash Test 

message: I would like to comment the following statement:
* 1 Byte/s (Bps or B/s) corresponds to 8-bit/s (bps or b/s)
Although at first sight this seems correct, in fact it is not. Let's take as an example the plain old RS-232 connection. A typical scenario for sending one byte over this kind of communication medium consists of one start bit, eight data bits and one stop bit, or a total of 10 bits. Although the start and stop bits are overhead and not useful data, they do participate in the communication process and do take time to transfer and process. So, a typical 8N1 9600 b/s communication does not transfer 1200 (=9600/8) bytes each second but only 960 (=9600/10). The difference of 240 bytes is not insignificant and grows when the rate grows (at rate 115200 b/s it is 2880 bytes).
To complicate matters, an RS-232 line may be configured to use as low as 5 data bits up to as high as 8 data bits, may use one, one and a half or two stop bits and may have or not have a parity bit. In the minimum case (5N1) this makes 7 bits per byte and in the maximum case (e.g. 8E2) - 12 bits per byte.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazibara (talk • contribs) 15:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a clumsy way of stating that a byte is 8 bits. Extraneous in the first place, in my opinion. Radiodef (talk) 00:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1 Byte/s (Bps or B/s) corresponds to 8-bit/s (bps or b/s) - false or true? 

message: Throughput is ultimately the number of bits successfully delivered.
Fidelia215050517 (talk) 15:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Throughput 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bit rate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091230154914/http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C2845%2C1180143%2C00.asp to http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0%2C2845%2C1180143%2C00.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since the title is Bit rate I assume a search-replace would be in order to make things consistent. What about usage or the term and links here from other articles? Is there an argument for retaining bitrate anywhere in the encyclopedia (excepting quotes and titles in sources)? ~Kvng (talk) 18:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Bit rate is fine, just go ahead. --Zac67 (talk) 19:18, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bit rate or Bitrate