MP3 encoding is already about as good as it gets.
Other formats may do a wee bit better in size or quality, but not much.
ZIPping won't work at all. (MP3 already does the same result differently, leaving ZIP nothing to do but bloat some corners.)
You DO have options.
8-bit or 16-bit? 8-bit is pretty bad, you want 16.
Mono or stereo? On most tracks, stereo is larger but nowhere near twice the size: MP3 finds what is similar left and right and only sends it once.
Sample-rate? 11,025 to 44,100 samples per second.
Compression ratio? (This is not always called that, and in some encoders it may not be directly tweakable.)
Stereo 16-bit 44,100sps is CD quality. When MP3-compressed 4:1 it is very near-CD quality, but requires 320Kbps or 7-8 MegaBytes per 3 minutes. Compressed 11:1 it is 128K or 3 MegaBytes for 3 minutes.
Most MP3 encoding tools will show "128K" and "320K" options.
If you have a freebie website with 10MB storage, 320K allows 4 minutes of great fidelity, 128K allows 10 minutes of very good audio.
The majority of iTunes and Amazon MP3 offerings are encoded 128K. That's a happy-zone for many listeners.
I had an MP3 on a now-defunct website, encoded 8-bit mono 11,020sps and 88:1 compression. It streamed at only 1KB/second, was only a few seconds long, and even on dial-up would usually load before the graphics. Yeah, it took some spackle and sugar to make it not suck bad. Not a way to sell yourself.