[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

 

[fr4c]

since you have an iPod, it makes sense to rip in Apple Lossless or 320 AAC.

 

[Jahn]

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!

 

[msflsim]

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)

 

[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.

 

[KevC]

192AAC

 

[msflsim]

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?

 

[Skylab]

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).

 

[blessingx]

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).

 

[jiiteepee]

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

 

[msflsim]

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...

 

[Skylab]

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).

 

[msflsim]

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..

 

[jiiteepee]

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

 

[msflsim]

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..