IPOD Bitrate ripping question
May 11, 2006 at 12:56 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 45

supersonic1414

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 9, 2006
Posts
117
Likes
0
I am a new recruit to the world of audiophiles and have been told to get the most out of my idop and IEM's, I need to up my bit rate from 128 to at least 256, if not 320.

I thought no problem and started the replacement process on my 9000 songs via re-ripping to 320. However, I am starting to realize even my 60 gig ipod will not hold all of these at 320...Is this task worth it?

Any suggestions?
 
May 11, 2006 at 1:09 PM Post #2 of 45

memepool

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Posts
2,689
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by supersonic1414
I am a new recruit to the world of audiophiles and have been told to get the most out of my idop and IEM's, I need to up my bit rate from 128 to at least 256, if not 320.

I thought no problem and started the replacement process on my 9000 songs via re-ripping to 320. However, I am starting to realize even my 60 gig ipod will not hold all of these at 320...Is this task worth it?

Any suggestions?



Apple lossless is the best in terms of quality to space ratio. MP3's are almost the same size as uncompressed files at 320 so it kind of defeats the object of the exercise. AAC (MP4) is much better at low bitrates than MP3 which is a pretty old technology now (early 90's).
Whether you will be able to hear any discernable difference is more of a question. If you just use your Ipod for travelling then 128 might suffice but if you do any serious listening you will notice a big difference between 128 / 160 / 192 etc.
The best thing to do is rip some of your favourite songs at a load of different codecs and see what you can live with.
 
May 11, 2006 at 2:22 PM Post #3 of 45

mrarroyo

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Posts
19,073
Likes
29
While it is true that apple losless is better than mp3 the truth is that you may not be able to tell the diference. I say this while putting on my bullet proof and flame proof suit.

Here are my reasons and I am assuming you will use the rig as a portable setup:
1)To get the full benefit of lossless you need a very good iem. I am thinking at least an Ety ER4S, Shure E4, etc.
2)If on the run you will have a lot of background noise which will make it harder to truly tell the diference.
3)You would need a good amp (The Hornet, SR71, AE-1, Supermacro) to take advantage, this would mean a line out and an IC.
4)There is the issue of battery life. Using losseless the unit will have to go and read quite often versus a lower bitrate.
5)Finally to truly get the benefit you would need the iWine mod at $200

The total cost would be over $900 plus your player. Quite a bit if you ask me.

I believe that if you go 192 VBR set at highest setting you will not be able to tell the difference while using it on the run with average iems. Good luck.
 
May 11, 2006 at 3:44 PM Post #5 of 45

Febs

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
2,853
Likes
12
I strongly recommend that you spend a couple of hours using Foobar's ABX comparator to test different bitrates against an uncompressed file. The time that you spend will allow you to identify lowest bitrate at which music is transparent to you (i.e., indistinguishable from the original). That, in turn, will allow you to save space on your player without sacrificing any perceptible sound quality.

You might also want to consider ripping all of your music to lossless format, and then batch converting music to mp3 or aac for your player. That way, your music will be in lossless so that you'll never need to re-rip, and you'll still be able to use a lossy format on your player to save space.

I personally use LAME 3.97b2 to encode MP3s at -V5 for portable use. The files average around 135kbps (although they are VBR and individual frames may be up to 224kbps or more), and I have confirmed that they are indistinguishable to me on the equipment I use on the go. On my computer at home however, since for all intents and purposes I have unlimited space (currently 320 GB and extra hard drive space is relatively cheap), I keep all of my files in WavPack.
 
May 11, 2006 at 4:11 PM Post #6 of 45

supersonic1414

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 9, 2006
Posts
117
Likes
0
"I personally use LAME 3.97b2 to encode MP3s at -V5 for portable use.."

Can you explain what this means or how you do it? I am new to this and this is a bit greek, but I would love to understand how to do this and ehat it means..

Thanks.
 
May 11, 2006 at 4:17 PM Post #7 of 45

memepool

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Posts
2,689
Likes
13
Quote:

Originally Posted by mrarroyo
1)To get the full benefit of lossless you need a very good iem. I am thinking at least an Ety ER4S, Shure E4, etc.
2)If on the run you will have a lot of background noise which will make it harder to truly tell the diference.
3)You would need a good amp (The Hornet, SR71, AE-1, Supermacro) to take advantage, this would mean a line out and an IC.
4)There is the issue of battery life. Using losseless the unit will have to go and read quite often versus a lower bitrate.
5)Finally to truly get the benefit you would need the iWine mod at $200

The total cost would be over $900 plus your player. Quite a bit if you ask me.



Or alternatively just get a decent pair of sensitive closed headphones like the Sony Eggo D-66 from http://www.audiocubes.com/ for 90USD. The Ipod drives these loud and well enough to hear differences between various codecs even while on the move in a major city.
They are not too bulky and fold up very neatly for travelling. Definitely the best on-the-go heaphones I have come accross, unless of course you can find some D-77's on ebay.
tongue.gif
 
May 11, 2006 at 9:03 PM Post #8 of 45

mnhnhyouh

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Posts
255
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally Posted by supersonic1414
"I personally use LAME 3.97b2 to encode MP3s at -V5 for portable use.."

Can you explain what this means or how you do it? I am new to this and this is a bit greek, but I would love to understand how to do this and ehat it means..

Thanks.



There are a number of mp3 codecs out there, LAME (which stands for Lame Aint an MP3 Encoder) is the best of them, and version 3.97b2 is the latest version.

The -V5 setting is a quality setting. This means that the codec will keep the music at a certain quality, and use as many bits per second as necessary to get that quality. Silent parts, or soncially simple parts will have little data, complex parts will have more.

There is a great tutorial here

http://www.misticriver.net/showthread.php?t=14081

h
 
May 12, 2006 at 1:19 AM Post #10 of 45

scottder

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Posts
3,475
Likes
15
There is always Rockbox and OGG Vorbis
smily_headphones1.gif
 
May 12, 2006 at 2:23 AM Post #12 of 45

scottder

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Posts
3,475
Likes
15
Quote:

Originally Posted by fierce_freak
I'm debating between Wavpack and FLAC for my iMod when I get it back (i'll plop rockbox on there)


If you only need lossless, go with flac. If I am not mistaken it gets better compression rates. For me I do ogg vorbis Q5 and it works like a charm.

Scott
 
May 12, 2006 at 3:19 AM Post #14 of 45

scottder

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Posts
3,475
Likes
15
Quote:

Originally Posted by fierce_freak
I suppose I might try Vorbis...I'll be using the iMod as my main and portable source. Perhaps when I get the iMod back I'll do a quick test flac vs. ogg at various quality settings to see what I find acceptable.


Be sure to grab the latest ogg vorbis encoders.

http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/index.html
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top