[ultraviolet353]

just loaded my iPod with all my alt-preset-standard mp3's and I am little disappointed. They sound pretty good but do not get that loud on my V6's (I expected to be drowned in sound with these). On my EX70's they sound decent but distort at high volumes. I also have the iRiver IMP-550, and mp3's sound much better on that IMO (never distort with either EX70's or V-6's even cranked up). I always thought the iPod was the best mp3 player???

 

[Sweet Spot]

Quote:

I always thought the iPod was the best mp3 player???

And what have you been basing that on ? Other peoples perceptions of course. Well, to some people it's the truth. Don't be disappointed if the sound 'isn't for you', it happens. People have different tastes and perceptions of how things sound.

Why don't you first try running those Mp3's through Mp3 gain. Perhpas the levels could use some adjusting. Then why don't you try encoding at a different bitrate, or a non standard or pre set setting. Make your own encoding argument...OR you could always try AAC and see if that does it for you. Exhaust your options before you make quick judgements or decisions.

I love my IHP's sound quality, but from time to time, I'll get my hands on some files that just don't shine like they should..it's all in the encoding method.

 

[terrymx]

why not try enconding your mp3 at 192vbr or 256vbr instead?

 

[JeffL]

APS is far superior to either of those encoding methods. Besides, APS is 192VBR, albeit with several optimizations that make it far superior.

 

[blessingx]

Gotta say if you think the iPod/V6 combo doesn't go loud enough, it's not the player or headphones that's the problem. They go plenty loud.

 

[austonia]

maybe he has one of those european iPods with the inhibited volume level..?

 

[TonyTripleA]

I think you have something causing "an issue" for you. The sound on my ipod is not distorted even at full volume... unless the bass boost is on and the track is a very bassy one (Norah Jones every time).

I second the suggestion to try a rip in AAC or some quality format. Choose at least 224 k/s. If that sounds poorly I can offer not other suggestions, but heck, it might just sound okay.

Here's hoping.

TonyAAA

 

[TMC]

I've got a question for all you iPod owners out there. Have you noticed if the iPod plays mp3 worse than it does AAC of similar bitrates? I did some DAP-research before a purchase a few months ago and I've come across a lot more complaints about mp3's sounding bad on their iPod than I've read about people complaining about AAC on it. Is it just that mp3 is more widely available and due to that have more complaints, or is there a difference of quality on playback of these 2 formats?

 

[rextrade]

The ipod shouldn't distort at high volumes--it will of course distort with most of the eq settings and newer recordings that are mastered at close to 0 db.

 

[GSTom1]

Quote:

Originally posted by JeffL APS is far superior to either of those encoding methods. Besides, APS is 192VBR, albeit with several optimizations that make it far superior.

Can someone please clarify the differences between mp3s encoded at alt-preset-standard and 192kbps VBR? Thanks!

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally posted by TMC Is it just that mp3 is more widely available and due to that have more complaints, or is there a difference of quality on playback of these 2 formats?

It's possible there's a decoder issue (like some -api/320 complaints of late), but at least with my first gen, I've noticed none myself. Although I think AAC and MP3 seem to sound a bit different, I can't say I've had any problems with the -aps/-apx MP3s I play regularly through the iPod (when compared to various software desktop decoders).

Quote:

Can someone please clarify the differences between mp3s encoded at alt-preset-standard and 192kbps VBR? Thanks!

At least with LAME, there is no 192 VBR really, it's 192 ABR (which is a type of VBR). So everything will average out at the end to 192 (silence less, complex passages more). This is better than CBR, as you can 'save' bitrates from sections for others. -APS isn't limited to an average and is a step further. It may end up resulting with a bigger or smaller file size, taking up the necessary bitrates for what the songs complexities require. Theorically (though never really in practice) it could mean a song that encodes 320 kb/s. Basically it takes the question "what bitrate do I encode at" out of the picture (though the -aps/-apx/-api question still remains). HydrogenAudio has more detailed info.

 

[GSTom1]

So if you encode the same wav file using -alt-preset-standard on seperate ocasions, theoretically could you end up with different file sizes each time, depending on how lame reads the file at that moment? Just curious.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally posted by GSTom1 So if you encode the same wav file using -alt-preset-standard on seperate ocasions, theoretically could you end up with different file sizes each time, depending on how lame reads the file at that moment? Just curious.

No, not if you use the same encoder version and settings each time. It's basically math. LAME should come to the same conclusion, if asked the same question.

 

[Stoner]

Have you tried converting a CD to AAC, say 192 and above? Maybe iPods do a better job playing AAC encoded material. I'd even try AIFF.

 

[daveman_84]

If APS doesn't sound good, or even a higher bitrate, on your iPod, then I doubt they'd sound much better on another player. Even though I haven't heard other players, the differences has to be marginal at best. Encoding techniques + headphones makes the biggest difference, IMO.