Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
elmo198

Another Sound thang!

Recommended Posts

ok I'm lost.. so mp3 them all into 256kb-320kb variable? and or use AAC loseless 192kb+?

If you only plan to use it for your iPod and in iTunes, then AAC Losless would be the way to go.

 

If you have disk space to burn, wav.

 

Although, it really depends on your ears and speakers, but if you have the quality in the file, then you needn't worry about missing out on anything later if you upgrade speakers or what-not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't stand mp3's they turn the treble (especially cymbals) into a hissy mess. Then again I'm a musician and probably more fussy, I didn't spend $800 for a nice Zildjian A-Custom to have the sound abused. =oP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think I have HDD to burn, even if I was a millionair, fileserver with serval terabytes is what i need if I were going wav format, got like 30,000 songs or so.

 

for arguement sake, each song in wave have an average of 60mb (yes?), times that with 30,000 is kinda lots 1,800,000mb, which is like 1.8 petabyte, I dont know, I dont own google anymore, sold that last week, lol

 

atm, I have 4.3 terabyte of space, but I have to say I only allocated about 320gb of that for music in mp3 and aac formats atm

 

PS: I love my music, I mean, even music I thought I would never liked, playing on my setup sounds good enough to listen to it again, shit like enigma sounds super groovey. omg, the other day I had my playlist on shuffle and this sound I didnt even know I had, "Don't Give Up" by "Gregorian with Sarah Brightman" on "Masters Of Chant" album sound so sick while I was playing WoW.. I mean, shit music will sound good on good setups, dont we all agree on that?

Edited by elmo198

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't stand mp3's they turn the treble (especially cymbals) into a hissy mess. Then again I'm a musician and probably more fussy, I didn't spend $800 for a nice Zildjian A-Custom to have the sound abused. =oP

AMEN! Brother!

 

Together we'll save the world from aural destruction!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1,800,000 Mb= 1.8 TB = Cheap as chips (Compared to serious audio gear). Admittedly I wouldn't software up-sample all of that ... (My speaker system works better on the fuller sound - some don't)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have 30 000 songs, i assume they're already MP3 or AAC or something.

 

if they're anyhitng but WAVs atm, DONT convert them. you'll kill them more.

 

This is more "for the future" info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as ive said before Logic ma'man, You're a very knowledgable guy and seem like a good bloke, but you really must stop subjecting your opinion as fact that all should follow.

 

You clearly like a limited number of songs, I personally, love foreign music even if i cant understand the lyrics, I love tribal\jungle beats and classical, I love electronica of all forms and power metal in every way.

 

The electronica category alone covers probably 10 000 good songs since it was invented through to demos i get sent today from DJ and producer mates.

 

Some people like to listen to everything, literally, some like a special selection like yourself, and some like to keep a collection full (eg full album rips) even if some songs do suck (myself).

 

Each to their own. We;re discussing sound quality here, an tech formats etc.

 

Oh also, as for someone pointing out FLAC isnt entirely lossless, fine, but anything that most people say 'is missing' most will agree is already lost when the CD is stamped because its already been digitally converted once.

 

Each has their own oppinion, but lets not try to interject them TOO much caus it'll start arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pursuit of the perfect sound is valiant effort but ultimately, for us mere mortals at least, a futile one. True sound reproduction from its source is ultimately impossible. Its based on so many things that I cant even begin to list them here. However, for the purposes of this post, I will keep it to the realm of computing. Here lies your first problem. Digital sampling/processing.

 

You all know of course, that in order for us to hear the sound in your headphones or speakers, it has to go through the system first which means it has to go through the CPU, if not, at least a digital processing device which means the .wav or the sound wave has to be digitised. That, in its very essense, changes the analog sound coming to our ears. That is the main reason why typical home theatre amplifiers never went the digital route in the strictest sense. Sure it may have had DSP capability but it mainly used it to change the way we perceived the sound in the first place, ie in the usual standards like DTS, Dolby 5.1 and so on.

 

You all, of course, know the reasons why we have mp3 today and thats mainly to do with the movie industry. Those of you who do some video editing will know what I am alluding to. Rendering a movie sequence, of say a WoW raid movie of about 1.5 - 2 minutes would be about 150-200Mb in size and thats with video compression. The same movie, with sound rendered in as an mp3 will take just under half that space. So, extrapolating from that, you can see that sound reproduction alone would take enormous amounts of data space on a DVD. Hence, the use of mp3 compression.

 

If you want the best reproduction in sound, dont channel it through your computer, it just makes it sound bad. No matter what you do with it, the very fact that youve channelled it through your computer, changes things. All that electronic interference going through a typical computer can do that to a signal.

 

BTW, this paragraph is for you. mp3 today is, apart from its usage in DVDs, mainly used in data streaming, eg youtube etc. It is also used in the myriad of devices we now know as mp3 players. We all know that there are Ipods and such out on the market which range up to 120Gb. However, not all of us carry around a what one would term as a brick in our pockets to carry said 30,000 songs, or whatever. If you have a read of statistics on just the Ipods alone, with most people these days purchasing either a Nano or a Shuffle, or the recently release IPhone. Data storage on those devices run from 2Gb up to 32Gb depending on which device you want to use. The point Im trying to make is that if you were to carry around a wav in our shuffle, it would only be able to take 1.5 CD of songs. Granted most systems have 160 times the storage capacity of a shuffle but it would mean, like I said earlier, carrying a brick around.

 

Ulimately, the choice is clear. If you want the best sound, dont even bother ripping it. If you want to put all your songs on a HDD, then the wav format will give you the best reproduction at the cost of a lot of HDD, where a typical song of about 4-5 minutes takes between 50-60Mb. If you absolutely must have it compress, use the highest bitrate possible to preserve the sound wave itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highest quality FLAC files aren't that much smaller than wav anyway.

 

(nice post strifus)

 

...and MS........there's nothing wrong with a good argument.

Gives the lurkers a good time and they might even learn something along the way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wowza. I've never really taken notice, but there is a huge difference between 96kbps and 320. You've made me picky now. But not to the extent of needing flac...

Edited by Viperxtx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highest quality FLAC files aren't that much smaller than wav anyway.

This is true, however FLAC's can be tagged with ID3 and album art, whereas wav (to my knowledge) can't.

 

Wowza. I've never really taken notice, but there is a huge difference between 96kbps and 320. You've made me picky now. But not to the extent of needing flac...

I honestly have no idea how you've never noticed the difference between them.....even with my shitty speakers and crap hearing I can hear the difference....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so now we have established that FLAC is good, what program do I use to rip future cds into FLAC?

A lot swear by EAC. Personally, I use CDex.

 

For playback, try out Foobar2000, as iTunes won't play FLAC's. You could also try Songbird, though I haven't used it myself.

 

Enjoy :)

Edited by cmos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you all.. hopefully my sound will sound even more awesome.

Don't stop now!

 

I'm having such a good t-ti-tiiime!

 

/Freddy Mercury

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hehe........I've been off enjoying the emotionally soul feeding sounds of uncompressed music ;)

 

 

Now! what's this MP3 nonsense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×