I perfer MP3 i think theyre the best because I have downloaded a bunch of them and had no problem but the WMA, I have problems out of them!
Hope this helps!!!:D

No I am trying to say that the original sound quality on a music CD is 128kb/sec, that increasing the bitrate on conversion to mp3 is an attempt to make up for the lossly format (mp3) reducing quality, and that the arguements usually are around when that increase in bitrate actually stops makes a difference, most of the aguements have it somewhere between 192 and 300kb/sec. It is pretty much a mute point in this day of fast internet connections, but was a critical issue at dial up speeds!

Geez, looks like 150kb/s to me.....

In kilobits per second, it's 1440, very much better than 128.
That's why 128Kbit MP3 files take up only a tenth of the space.
Even a 320 kilobit MP3 is lossy compared to a Redbook CD.

Soooo - you encode your MP3's at 1440kb/s? :)

The difference is size between CDA and Mp3, WMA etc etc is mostly due to the compression algorythms, (and of course some losses) not the amount of bits. EG convert a single CDA file to uncompressed wav file, it is the same size.

The bitrate is a literal measure of how many bits per second are used to express
the waveform. The difference in size is a direct consequence of that rate,
therefore a 1440 kilobit MP3 would be the exact same size as a redbook stream.
The uncompressed wave file you mention is encoded at exactly 1440 kilobits per
second if it is the exact same size.