[bonem]

Dear Head-Fier's

A few time ago I bought MP3 files from passionato.com, but I was dissatisfied with the audio quality so I made some investigations.

I made an experiment in order to check the sound quality of their files:

I got two files of the same recording:

1) A lossless FLAC file, top quality.
2) Passionato 320kbps MP3.

What I did:

I converted the FLAC into new MP3 files of different bitrates and compated the Passionato 320kbps MP3 to each of them. Here's what I found:

New 320 kbps MP3 quality ≈ Lossless FLAC quality.
New 64 kbps MP3 quality ≈ Passionato 320kbps MP3 quality!

Lossless

Normal MP3 320 kbps

Passionato.com MP3 320 kbps

As you can see, an important part of the audio signal is lost in the Passionato MP3, resulting in bad audio quality.

Not only that,

1. A click is heard between tracks due to bad ripping.
2. File tags are horrible.

My advice:

Do not buy anything from Passionato.com for now.

It's a better idea to buy the actual CD and then rip it as many of you do.

I hope it helps.

 

[krmathis]

That's just bad!

Whatever they did this is not 320kbps MP3 files I am willing to pay for.

 

[CodeToad]

This illustrates a fundamental problem distributors need to address quickly.

I will buy a lossless format in lieu of a cd at half the price of a CD but I will not buy a lossy format at any price.

And if you try to control what I do with MY file after I've paid for it with BS DRM crap then you have to use the file extension *.rockefeller and disclose your behind the scenes manipulation of mankind in a 25 page legal document spelling out your intentions and then, transfer of title of said file must be conducted at a title company, just like real estate.

 

[bonem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's just bad! Whatever they did this is not 320kbps MP3 files I am willing to pay for.

All the more you can get the CD for the same price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeToad /img/forum/go_quote.gif I will buy a lossless format in lieu of a cd at half the price of a CD but I will not buy a lossy format at any price.

So shall I do. What you said is so heartwarming and makes me feel I'm not lonely in the injustice of this world...

 

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

I really don't want to buy lossy files since they are available for free through the (legal) streaming Spotify serivce. I might still be interested in lossless files though, if they are in excellent condition. (Otherwise, I'll still prefer to rip a CD)

 

[milkweg]

Spotify is another service that is not available in my country. Probably because Canada has now been branded as a hot spot for piracy by Obama because he is a pawn of the RIAA.

 

[.Sup]

thanks for heads up, thats a poor conversion by them

 

[apatN]

Ouch. Most of my albums are downloaded but if I like an album I buy the real thing. It is nice to have the case and all if you enjoy the music.

 

[hh83917]

That's interesting, have you emailed them regarding the bad audio quality? and provide them the proof as well!

 

[ford2]

Sure seems a genuine site,maybe hang out for a bit longer,from there site:

The Passionato store is regularly being updated with new recordings and we are constantly updating the store with FLAC files. Passionato aim to have all recordings in FLAC version available in our store in the near future.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

It is still shocking that they would use anything other than LAME for MP3 encoding, especially for classical music. LAME is one of the few MP3 encoders that can do gapless. Gapless is very important for classical music. Why even bother with MP3 for classical if you are going to cripple it with gappy playback.

There is hope that maybe they can get the playback correct with FLAC. But they're still going to have to address the poor tagging.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is still shocking that they would use anything other than LAME for MP3 encoding, especially for classical music. LAME is one of the few MP3 encoders that can do gapless. Gapless is very important for classical music. Why even bother with MP3 for classical if you are going to cripple it with gappy playback. There is hope that maybe they can get the playback correct with FLAC. But they're still going to have to address the poor tagging.

1) How did you deduce that they do not use LAME?
2) What in the heck MP3 encoder has to do with gapless playback?

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1) How did you deduce that they do not use LAME? 2) What in the heck MP3 encoder has to do with gapless playback?

I assume they are not using LAME based on the poor encoding. If they are using LAME they are making some very very poor choices in command line switches.

The MP3 encoder used has a lot to do with whether an MP3 can play back gapless or not. My LAME encoded files play back with perfect gapless support using Foobar, J. River Media Center, iTunes, iPod, and a few other media players. LAME adds extra information to the file that enables supporting media players to do gapless playback. You don't get that with other encoders.

bonem mentioned that he gets a click between tracks. That click is most likely due to no gapless support.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif The MP3 encoder used has a lot to do with whether an MP3 can play back gapless or not. My LAME encoded files play back with perfect gapless support using Foobar, J. River Media Center, iTunes, iPod, and a few other media players. LAME adds extra information to the file that enables supporting media players to do gapless playback. You don't get that with other encoders. bonem mentioned that he gets a click between tracks. That click is most likely due to no gapless support.

You must be confusing this is with pregaps which are added during the ripping, MP3 encoder has nothing to do with that, it just loosely compresses the data. If the track was ripped badly in the first place (cut out at the end), you'll get interrupts even in wav.
But if you read somewhere that LAME indeed adds some gapless info at the end of file and can point to this info, that would be great. I just don't see how wav and flac can work gaplessly without that info then.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif You must be confusing this is with pregaps which are added during the ripping, MP3 encoder has nothing to do with that, it just loosely compresses the data. If the track was ripped badly in the first place (cut out at the end), you'll get interrupts even in wav. But if you read somewhere that LAME indeed adds some gapless info at the end of file and can point to this info, that would be great. I just don't see how wav and flac can work gaplessly without that info then.

The HydrogenAudio Wiki article on Gapless and the LAME Technical FAQ explain the issue.

MP3 encoding uses a fixed block size. If the song ends before the last block is full the rest of the block is filled with silence. That extra silence can cause an audible gap. LAME adds special info to the file that states how much silence was added so that the extra silence can be removed by supporting MP3 players.

There is also a similar issue with extra silence being added to the beginning of a track that needs to be stripped away.

If the media player supports the extra LAME info and does things correctly it is possible to get perfect gapless playback with MP3. Foobar, J. River Media Center, iTunes, and a few other players are able to get perfect gapless playback with LAME MP3 files.

Classical works sometimes have one movement go directly into another with no audible break. In a case like that you need an MP3 encoder that does proper gapless or you will likely end up with an audible gap that isn't supposed to be there.