Music - which format is best?
-
@utiler said:
I too prefer my CD's; always rather buy a CD than download.
Yes, it's still the best quality i think (excluding SACD and DVD-Audio...)
And i really never understood, how someone can buy a 196kbps or 256kbps crap download on itunes or something else for almost the same money as a CD...
-
@jean lemire said:
The mp3 file's dynamic cannot compare at all with the CD. I get deeper bass and better sound overall while using the CD.
When first looking at digital formats I did he same thing, but I could still hear the difference between mp3, WAV and lossless formats on an iPod and low quality hi-fi equipment. For that reason (and the fact that I mostly use high-end hi-fi) I download or convert to WAV where possible and then convert again to a lossless format for use on my iPod*.
If WAV isn't available or you are concerned about storage (which is really cheap these days) then I agree with Numerobis - Flac is the way to go.
*I still prefer my vinyl and CDs though
-
@numerobis said:
And i really never understood, how someone can buy a 196kbps or 256kbps crap download on itunes or something else for almost the same money as a CD...
That.......and kids who only listen to music playing out loud via their phone
. It's like choosing a broken down degraded VHS over Blue-ray!Then again, from the day I first got into good hi-fi I found that most people just cannot tell the difference between cheap stereos and audiophile quality equipment.
-
Hieru, I think you said it best; I listened to a few albums that I have ripped to itunes that I have had for 15 years or so and yes they are considerably softer. I wonder how to get volumes similar to say a new CD? Maybe trial and error..
@numberobis - you mention 196 and 256kbps for itunes downloads; Can you explain what that means? I assume level of quality...
-
I'm not sure that there is a way to control the levels. Besides which, when ripping from a CD I suspect that raising the output would screw with the sound quality and engineering.
Whilst the recordings are softer they also tend to cover a broader dynamic range. The simple solution is to adjust the volume during playback. The only time this becomes a problem is when listening on an MP3 player (they don't usually go loud enough for older/quality recordings). You can compensate with a portable headphone amp - which you should probably look at getting anyway.
-
@utiler said:
I listened to a few albums that I have ripped to itunes that I have had for 15 years or so and yes they are considerably softer. I wonder how to get volumes similar to say a new CD? Maybe trial and error..
"numerobis wrote:
If you want to level your mp3's you can use mp3gain: http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/
http://lifehacker.com/230105/alpha-geek-whip-your-mp3-library-into-shape-part-i-+-level-the-volume"But store a copy of the original! It is meant not to affect the quality, but who knows...
@utiler said:
@numberobis - you mention 196 and 256kbps for itunes downloads; Can you explain what that means? I assume level of quality...
yes sure, kbps, kb/s or kbit/s is the bitrate of the tracks, the level of compression. Uncompressed CD-audio material has 1411 kbit/s - so even the best mp3 quality is with 320kbit/s much worse. (You can get 640kbit/s with LAME encoder but this is not standart)
As far as i remember itunes (and others) only sold 160/192 kbit/s "low quality" files, even only 128kb/s earlier.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc_Digital_AudioFLAC is also compressing the data stream, but in a lossless way.
-
That's OK for Mp3, but is there an equivalent for lossless formats that doesn't mess up the way songs have been mixed/engineered?
-
I think this could be done by ReplayGain
but the player has to support it
-
Ta, will take a look....
-
Flac is the best compressed format you can have.
Still, PCM format sounds a bit better though. (wav, aiff, SD2, PCM etc )
Of course, a 24 96 or 192 sound format is much much better.
Being a mac user, indeed, iTunes under OSX is a superb playback device, but not the crap that itunes sells around.
And, yes, I have a very very expensive HI End system here. (still professionally mixing and mastering works of some friends)
Nothing to compare with the already mentioned setups on this forum.BTW, indeed Pete, vinyl sounds great, if you have the appropriate hi end player and the original vinyls. Else, better not. A 24 96 format, using HiEnd equipment like A to D converters, phono stage (valve based-better) etc, can capture most of it on a digital format.
Advertisement