[madcow235]

I can definitely hear the difference between Flac, or Apple lossless, and API. I figure why not just use apple lossless for my iPod since I'm never going to be using it for more than a day, around how much i can fit on I think, so I won't have to worry about the songs repeating. Then i can just dock it and put new songs on when I want.

 

[Duncan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by easypeasy ...but somehow it hangs my N10

I'm guessing that you do NOT mean Sony MZ-N10 MD recorder?

Might well be a daft question... but just curious, seeing that if it were SonicStage (well, Atrac) would butcher your files further anyway. Quote:

Originally Posted by madcow235 I can definitely hear the difference between Flac, or Apple lossless, and API. I figure why not just use apple lossless for my iPod since I'm never going to be using it for more than a day, around how much i can fit on I think, so I won't have to worry about the songs repeating. Then i can just dock it and put new songs on when I want.

I wonder if it would be worth me re-ripping some of my CDs that are currently sitting on my iPod as 256k AAC to be Apple Lossless...

Trouble is then i'd have to start playing with custom playlists etc in iTunes, seeing that the 2400ish tracks i've got on the iPod leave it with just over 1gb free...

Is it worth the added hassle??

 

[Jmmmmm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duncan I'm guessing that you do NOT mean Sony MZ-N10 MD recorder? Might well be a daft question... but just curious, seeing that if it were SonicStage (well, Atrac) would butcher your files further anyway.I wonder if it would be worth me re-ripping some of my CDs that are currently sitting on my iPod as 256k AAC to be Apple Lossless... Trouble is then i'd have to start playing with custom playlists etc in iTunes, seeing that the 2400ish tracks i've got on the iPod leave it with just over 1gb free... Is it worth the added hassle??

i dont know, i can tell you it is NOT fun reripping cd after cd. It's killed several days for me.

 

[easypeasy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duncan I'm guessing that you do NOT mean Sony MZ-N10 MD recorder? Might well be a daft question... but just curious, seeing that if it were SonicStage (well, Atrac) would butcher your files further anyway.I wonder if it would be worth me re-ripping some of my CDs that are currently sitting on my iPod as 256k AAC to be Apple Lossless... Trouble is then i'd have to start playing with custom playlists etc in iTunes, seeing that the 2400ish tracks i've got on the iPod leave it with just over 1gb free... Is it worth the added hassle??

No, it's an iRiver N10, playing files on my Sony NR-70 (PDA) just became unbearable with it's 128Mb Memory Stick limit and choosy MP3 player....

 

[wolfen68]

Sadly, the quality differences from one album to the next can be far greater than the differences anyone might experience while comparing lossy to lossless.....

This fact has really calmed me down on this issue. For now (and I hope to not go through this again) I rip everything at 200 - 225 kbps VBR.

 

[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfen68 Sadly, the quality differences from one album to the next can be far greater than the differences anyone might experience while comparing lossy to lossless.....

yes, that's the sad part about our hobby... neither source nor amp, neither phone nor media nor compression is most important when it comes to sound quality - that place is reserved for the actual recording, and there's not much you can do about it (looking for the occasional well-done remastering being an exception). get the best hardware money can buy, use lame, lossless or no compression, you're still stuck with unbearably "hot", flat, distorted recordings.

and the even sadder part? recording quality keeps getting worse and worse... video killed the radio star, as one of the most successful producers once sang, but nowadays radio - with its stupid "louder is better" mantra - is killing music.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earache if you are trying to judge by playing back the two on your ipod, i agree, it will be hard to tell the difference. But, and it's a big but, hook the line out to a reasonably high end audio system and i will bet that it's a slam dunk which is which.... any takers?

Not a real good bet on your end as there are several blind test studies around demonstrating that even trained listeners have a very difficult time in reliably resolving hi-bitrate (192 and above) samples from the source, even on very high-end hardware. I have never seen a single legitimate test that resulted in the above comparison being a 'slam dunk'... more like some participants can sometimes detect a slight difference on some samples. If you were talking about 128kb files then maybe, but once you get to the higher end of the bitrate scale all of the 'slam dunk' talk usually dissipates when the true blind testing begins.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Sadly, the quality differences from one album to the next can be far greater than the differences anyone might experience while comparing lossy to lossless..... This fact has really calmed me down on this issue. For now (and I hope to not go through this again) I rip everything at 200 - 225 kbps VBR.

Quote:

yes, that's the sad part about our hobby... neither source nor amp, neither phone nor media nor compression is most important when it comes to sound quality - that place is reserved for the actual recording, and there's not much you can do about it (looking for the occasional well-done remastering being an exception). get the best hardware money can buy, use lame, lossless or no compression, you're still stuck with unbearably "hot", flat, distorted recordings.

You guys just hit the nail on the head. It's a shame more of the talk here isn't about important issues like this instead of 128 vs. 256 and AAC vs. MP3.

 

[Oga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riordan yes, that's the sad part about our hobby... neither source nor amp, neither phone nor media nor compression is most important when it comes to sound quality - that place is reserved for the actual recording, and there's not much you can do about it (looking for the occasional well-done remastering being an exception). get the best hardware money can buy, use lame, lossless or no compression, you're still stuck with unbearably "hot", flat, distorted recordings. and the even sadder part? recording quality keeps getting worse and worse... video killed the radio star, as one of the most successful producers once sang, but nowadays radio - with its stupid "louder is better" mantra - is killing music.

If you're listening to most pop music sure. There is lots of music out there which does not fit this definition above, and is crafted and mastered with love. Of course most of you all dont buy that music, so there's the problem.

I listen to a lot of dance music, hip-hop, jazz, reggae. Within this, there are TONS are tons of well crafted releases on labels like Naked Music or OM for example. But you're not going to find it on by going to the top 100 list or the radio playlist.

 

[NeilPeart]

Quote:

Of course most of you all dont buy that music, so there's the problem.

Does it get any more condescending or elitist? I'm sure most of the members here are eclectic music fans with tastes ranging from polka to bluegrass. Also some of the most horribly-mastered albums are in the hip hop and dance genres (which are both some of the worst offenders of quality engineering/mastering). There are just as many well-mastered pop/rock albums as there are hip hop and electronica (if not more). Also, while many reggae albums aren't mastered too hot, there are plenty that are noisy or poorly mixed. There are plenty of sorry jazz and classical releases as well (though "hot" classical albums are a rarity). Thanks for the lessons in musical appreciation, Oga; perhaps one day we may all attain such a varied taste in music. I lament that my 500+ CDs of Top 40 will have to suffice for now.

 

[wolfen68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeilPeart Does it get any more condescending or elitist? I'm sure most of the members here are eclectic music fans with tastes ranging from polka to bluegrass. Also some of the most horribly-mastered albums are in the hip hop and dance genres (which are both some of the worst offenders of quality engineering/mastering). There are just as many well-mastered pop/rock albums as there are hip hop and electronica (if not more). Also, while many reggae albums aren't mastered too hot, there are plenty that are noisy or poorly mixed. There are plenty of sorry jazz and classical releases as well (though "hot" classical albums are a rarity). Thanks for the lessons in musical appreciation, Oga; perhaps one day we may all attain such a varied taste in music. I lament that my 500+ CDs of Top 40 will have to suffice for now.

LOL...no doubt

 

[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeilPeart 'm sure most of the members here are eclectic music fans with tastes ranging from polka to bluegrass.

yes, if not even broader: i also like bavarian yodeling, swiss alphorns and the sound of music

oga:
yes, radio-tuned hot recordings are more common in mainstream rock, pop, hip-hop, "soul", "r'n'b", dance etc. because that's where radio is an important distribution/marketing tool and that's where corporate greed & incompetence digs deepest. but the tons of quality recordings in any genre are outweighed by the tons of mediocre and gruesome recordings in any genre. and that's the point of our detour in this discussion: that often the recording's quality is more important than the format/compression you use.

 

[Oga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riordan yes, if not even broader: i also like bavarian yodeling, swiss alphorns and the sound of music oga: yes, radio-tuned hot recordings are more common in mainstream rock, pop, hip-hop, "soul", "r'n'b", dance etc.

Actually most dance music and r&b produced doesn't ever get to radio in the first place! Its the badly produced and insipid commercial-oriented junk that gets on the radio and that sells well.

Most of the stuff crafted and produced with care, with a mind to true creativity or art or expression doesn't even get on the radar - or even expect to be noticed. So for example, if you are out there listing to Sisco or Nelly or their failed wanna be's and thinking you actually know or can talk about hip-hop - wrong.

Like I said, if people actually voted for quality-produced music with their money, we wouldn't have in this situation. So don't buy the junk music on the radio and the compain - or even think - that all music is like that...

 

[Riordan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oga Like I said, if people actually voted for quality-produced music with their money, we wouldn't have in this situation. So don't buy the junk music on the radio and the compain - or even think - that all music is like that...

ok, i'll try again:
you seem to agree that there's ONE recording problem mainly affecting radio-friendly mainstream music (which i, by the the way, listen to as much and with as great an enjoyment as bluegrass and swiss yodelling). that is my point no.1

my point no. 2 is that bad recordings occur quite frequently in any genre - high quality content (whatever that is) is not immune. prime examples: classic, jazz, electronica.

my point no. 3: if you like a particular rendition but the recording is mediocre or worse, you can't do anything about it. if the recording is bad, compression rate or the choice of dap or encoder makes little difference. this is seldom discussed and often overlooked.

if you haven't come across this problem yet, your experience is not as great as you seem to think.

 

[allenf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riordan my point no. 3: if you like a particular rendition but the recording is mediocre or worse, you can't do anything about it. if the recording is bad, compression rate or the choice of dap or encoder makes little difference. this is seldom discussed and often overlooked.

I don't think that this is true for all musical genres; most of my Reggae/Dub stuff - especially from the 70's - is crudely recorded but I still encode it @ 320 - this preserves the general toe-tapping rawness and attack of the original (flawed) recording IMO.