quality of your music collection?
post-1455037
Thread Starter
Post #1 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
Sorry for the double thread if anyone disscusted this before but how are you guys commpresing your music? What format do you use WAV, MP3, applelossless or something different?
The reason why i am asking is because i found myself stuck and having to do a lot of re-riping of my music collection (over 60,000 songs) before i even think of a next headphone/amp upgrade...


I realised (thru E5's) that the quality of most songs that i have is CRAP..unlistenable for me..(with E5)

Im going to get rid of most bad quality stuff for now b/c whats the point in having good headphones/amp if the quality to start with is bad..damn..

Bassicaly i want to start a new high quality collection of the genres that i like but i want to get it right, i dont care if the file size is going to be bigger but i want quality not quantity.

So any ideas how to do that?



I guess i have a couple of sleepless nights ahead of me
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455047
Post #2 of 60

fr4c

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
3,186
Reaction score
10
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Posts
3,186
Likes
10
since you have an iPod, it makes sense to rip in Apple Lossless or 320 AAC.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455050
Post #3 of 60

Jahn

Headphoneus Supremus Prolificus
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Messages
21,332
Reaction score
29
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
21,332
Likes
29
First of all, I listen to my CD to see if it's worth burning at a decent space-grabbing compression. If it is, I'll rip it in 320 AAC. If it's not, I rip it in 192 AAC, which is good enough. I saved 20 gigs on my ipod that way and honestly my portable tunes sound just fine!
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455054
Post #4 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
Hmm...Thats all fine when u strart off CD's but most of my stuff is downloaded/collected from the internet or other ppl..

..320 AAC or apple format sounds great but only if u start with a CD..
Is there a way to 'enhance' the quality of current songs?

(what i meant by re-rip=re-download)
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455063
Post #5 of 60

chrisfromalbany

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
1,877
Reaction score
10
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Posts
1,877
Likes
10
I downloaded most of my music from internet and now I am downloading from the russian site 320 AAC files because I can hear the difference.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455090
Post #6 of 60

KevC

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Messages
367
Reaction score
0
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
367
Likes
0
192AAC
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455119
Post #7 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany
I downloaded most of my music from internet and now I am downloading from the russian site 320 AAC files because I can hear the difference.


what site is that?
and what music do they have there?
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455120
Post #8 of 60

Skylab

Reviewerus Prolificus
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
21,802
Reaction score
978
Location
The Court of the Crimson King
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Location
The Court of the Crimson King
Posts
21,802
Likes
978
I rip mostly in Apple Lossless, but for CDs with known mediocre sound quality, I use AAC/320. I sometimes rip in Apple Lossless AND AAC/320, move the 320 files to the iPod, and then delete them, leaving only the ALC files in iTunes (this works because I manage my iPod's manually).
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455135
Post #9 of 60

blessingx

HeadFest '07 Graphic Designer
Supplier of fine logos! His visions of Head-Fi
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
13,179
Reaction score
22
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Posts
13,179
Likes
22
Music

2/3 ALAC for home, downsampled to 224 AAC for iPod.
1/3 MP3 (mostly "--alt -preset extreme" ) from sites.

Audiobooks/Spoken Word

Most in both 48 kbps CBR mono/"--alt -preset medium -a --lowpass 10" MP3 for other players and 40 kbps mono AAC (for .m4b iPod bookmarking).
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455145
Post #10 of 60

jiiteepee

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
1,573
Reaction score
52
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Posts
1,573
Likes
52
Quote:

Originally Posted by msflsim
Sorry for the double thread if anyone disscusted this before but how are you guys commpresing your music? What format do you use WAV, MP3, applelossless or something different?
The reason why i am asking is because i found myself stuck and having to do a lot of re-riping of my music collection (over 60,000 songs) before i even think of a next headphone/amp upgrade...


I realised (thru E5's) that the quality of most songs that i have is CRAP..unlistenable for me..(with E5)

Im going to get rid of most bad quality stuff for now b/c whats the point in having good headphones/amp if the quality to start with is bad..damn..

Bassicaly i want to start a new high quality collection of the genres that i like but i want to get it right, i dont care if the file size is going to be bigger but i want quality not quantity.

So any ideas how to do that?



I guess i have a couple of sleepless nights ahead of me



Hi

I read a test of portable 'mp3' players (iRiver iHP-120, Apple iPod, iAudio M3, Philips HDD120, Creative Nomand Jukebox Zen Xtra and Archos Gmini 220)
and it states the iPod sound quality is not as good as you like to hope in this price group;

- iPod has the highest 'distortion level' and 'bass clipping'
- output power is weakest
- quality problems with mp3 decoding
- gloomy and strenuous sound with bundled headphones

Measured bass clipping:
200Hz -0.5 dB
100Hz -1.0 dB
50Hz -2.5 dB
20Hz -7.5 dB

So, I think the iPod might be your weakest loop in chain you're having.

jiitee
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455163
Post #11 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by jiiteepee
Hi

I read a test of portable 'mp3' players (iRiver iHP-120, Apple iPod, iAudio M3, Philips HDD120, Creative Nomand Jukebox Zen Xtra and Archos Gmini 220)
and it states the iPod sound quality is not as good as you like to hope in this price group;

- iPod has the highest 'distortion level' and 'bass clipping'
- output power is weakest
- quality problems with mp3 decoding
- gloomy and strenuous sound with bundled headphones

Measured bass clipping:
200Hz -0.5 dB
100Hz -1.0 dB
50Hz -2.5 dB
20Hz -7.5 dB

So, I think the iPod might be your weakest loop in chain you're having.

jiitee




This is interesting, first time i hear this about the ipod...i would actually 'sacrifice' my ipod to get a different source that would fix this...
t must state in the test which mp3 player is better or doesnt have those 'problems' as you say...
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455176
Post #12 of 60

Skylab

Reviewerus Prolificus
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
21,802
Reaction score
978
Location
The Court of the Crimson King
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Location
The Court of the Crimson King
Posts
21,802
Likes
978
Quote:

Originally Posted by jiiteepee

So, I think the iPod might be your weakest loop in chain you're having.

jiitee



That really depends. The iPod's sound quality is generally excellent with a few exceptions that I have recently read about -- one is headphones with impedances below 32 ohms, and the other is it's EQ. It's EQ is not so hot, and can cause distortion.

Also, the free headphones that come with iPod definitely suck.

But if you have a ton of music that is MP3 encoded at 128k (or god forbid less), that is certainly going to noticably effect sound quality, far more than bass distortion at 20 Hz (the ear is very insensitive to distortion at very low frequencies).
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455187
Post #13 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
i started realizing the difference between 128k, 192k and 320k

and now if i notice it, i imediatelly get fed up and delete the track..

..and yes ipod buds are not even worth mentioning..
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455199
Post #14 of 60

jiiteepee

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
1,573
Reaction score
52
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Posts
1,573
Likes
52
Quote:

Originally Posted by msflsim
This is interesting, first time i hear this about the ipod...i would actually 'sacrifice' my ipod to get a different source that would fix this...
t must state in the test which mp3 player is better or doesnt have those 'problems' as you say...



Source: MikroBitti 6/2004 (Finnish, p.40-45)

iRiver iHP-120 was the winner (*****) on this test. It's only weak point was the UI (user interface).

iPod came 2nd (****) with iAudio M3 which has better sound quality but worse interface than iPod.

jiitee

P.S.
Here are couple discussion of the quality of different compression formats.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.asp?m=4...ey=ogg&#455053
http://forum.rightmark.org/topic.cgi?id=4:698
 
     Share This Post       
post-1455233
Post #15 of 60

msflsim

Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
95
Reaction score
10
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Posts
95
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by jiiteepee
Source: MikroBitti 6/2004 (Finnish, p.40-45)

iRiver iHP-120 was the winner (*****) on this test. It's only weak point was the UI (user interface).

iPod came 2nd (****) with iAudio M3 which has better sound quality but worse interface than iPod.

jiitee

P.S.
Here is some discussion of the quality of different compression formats.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.asp?m=4...ey=ogg&#455053



Thanks for the info jiiteepee, the graph comparsion is quite interesting, now im riping on of the rare CD's that i have to AAC/320k... ill post the differences..
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top