question about mp3's

[HeadphonesNewGuy]

Hey everyone, I don't know if I'm posting this in the right forum, but I am a student who is a pretty proud owner of a pair of PX-200's. I use them only for listening to music out of the headphone out of my Dell D600 laptop. I have burned all of my cd's to my computer's hard drive using iTunes. What I want to make sure I'm doing is getting the best possible sound out of my music. After I pop in the CD I go to Edit-->Preferences--->Importing then I change the setting to "Custom" and burn at 320kbps only in stereo. Am I doing the right thing to get the clearest sound out of my music? I don't care about space I only have 2.5 GB of music on a 40 GB hard drive. I must say the music sounds pretty good out of the PX200's especially for what I paid for the headphones ($25!!). Is there a way that my sound could be even better by burning my cd's to the hard drive differently?? Thanks for your help in advance...

 

[ayn]

Use Apple Lossless in iTunes instead.

 

[go_vtec]

Would you like a blue or red pill?

 

[iamdone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ayn Use Apple Lossless in iTunes instead.

It's overkill if he only using px200, you won't hear the difference. If you plan on getting better headphones at any point then lossless is the way to go. Also don't bother an amp with those headphones either.

 

[go_vtec]

Wow already both blue and red pill versions of anwsers are posted! Let me add my 2KB worth.

Blue Pill Version: Use 320kbps AAC or 192 to 320kbps variable bit rate MP3s for the best quality or best portability.

Red Pill Version: With your current setup, it won't make much difference as long as you rip/encode them (not burn them, it's a wrong use of the term) above 192kbps. However for future compatability (if you should decide to upgrade your phones and soundcard), I would highly recommend going Apple lossless.

 

[crazyfrenchman27]

Except the red pill is B$...it's all in your head.

There is no humanly-audible difference between 320 AAC and Apple Lossless; quit fooling yourself. Listen to 1000 songs copied in both 320 AAC and Apple lossless and try to guess what they are without looking at the screen.

You won't get much more/much less than half of them right.

I don't care how good your gear is or what genres you listen to; it doesn't matter.

There is no discernible difference.

 

[EdipisReks]

personally, i rip rock/electronica etc at 192 AAC and classical/jazz at 320. with MP3, well encoded files above 192 generally sound fine, though 160's sound kind of...off...to me. i find AAC is a much better system than MP3, however. the only time i use Apple Lossless is when i'm archiving something, or when i'm recording from vinyl.

 

[HeadphonesNewGuy]

Thank you to everyone who replied. It seems like I did the right thing by just "ripping" them at 320. If and when I decide to purchase an iPod I will likely upgrade my headphones as well and then consider using Apple's Lossless - but considering I've already ripped 2.5 gb in 320 AAC mode, i might as well just keep it if it really doesn't make a difference.

Isaiah

 

[Talonz]

The biggest thing you can do right now is get a USB sound card for your laptop. I have a D600, and when it (the Sigmatel audio chip) is paired with my MS-1 it sounds horrible and I can't even listen to it. The noise floor is the worst I've ever heard and dynamics are really weak.

 

[HeadphonesNewGuy]

which sound card should I get? obviously I am going to get an external one. I have a pair of PX200's and a Dell D600.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

I've been really happy with my Echo Indigo, it's pretty highly regarded around here, I think.

If you're looking for an entirely external solution, an M-Audio flavor would probably be your best bet.

 

[Mr.Radar]

I second the Echo Indigo reccomendation. They're suppost to sound better than most USB solutions, and have a decent headphone amp built-in.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyfrenchman27 Except the red pill is B$...it's all in your head. There is no humanly-audible difference between 320 AAC and Apple Lossless; quit fooling yourself. Listen to 1000 songs copied in both 320 AAC and Apple lossless and try to guess what they are without looking at the screen. You won't get much more/much less than half of them right. I don't care how good your gear is or what genres you listen to; it doesn't matter. There is no discernible difference.

Okay, let me rewrite my sarcastic response.

I have my doubts also concerning many who complain lossy is unlistenable, that there is such a large difference between 320 AAC (or LAME -api or Ogg -q9 & 10) and lossless, etc. But your God-like proclamations that its impossible for anyone to hear the difference no matter what their hearing, equipment, etc. is down-right ridiculous, and a hell of a lot closer to BS than anything else said here. Please tell us of the equipment, your test poll, etc. that proves your point. And don't start siting Hydrogen tests until they start listing the equipment used. They never do and it's their big blind spot. Man you must be one confident guy. Especially since your sig says you use lossless.

 

[Zaied]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphonesNewGuy sounds pretty good out of the PX200's especially for what I paid for the headphones ($25!!)

25$! Please explain becaue I just bought a pair of PX100s for 47$ (+shipping)

 

[crazyfrenchman27]

You should do what I recommended; load up a 1000 songs copied in both formats and try to guess what they are without looking at the screen. I doubt you will get much more than half wrong/half right. I think that will provide sufficient evidence that the red pill is all B$.

First prove that you can tell the difference between 320 AAC and Lossless...because there are quite a few people who say they can't.

There seems to be mounting evidence supporting the notion that people can't even tell the difference between 192 kbps and 320 kbps! Why should I believe that there is a discernible difference between 320 kbps and lossless?

I don't know where this was posted, but a few people (including purported "experts") blindly ABed the two formats with good systems (from 192 kbps to 320 kbps), and they couldn't pick them out as well as they thought they could.