MP3s VS CDs

[Codeine]

There is a difference obviously, but what about MP3s encoded at 320 kbps? I have heard about an open source method, called OGG, and I have never heard it for myself.

I find that there is a big difference in the quality of MP3s, and CDs that I owb. Which is why I buy CDs.

What is your preference and why?

[ScotchGuy]

I like not paying for things, this is especially true when I can receive the same quality for free as I could for paying for it.

I say 320 kbps is equal to CD. I can't tell the difference, I think the only person that could would be Waz.

I VOTE MP3, even if there is some tiny difference between 320 and CD quality I still wouldn't care because I'm a cheap bastard.

[Codeine]

A lot of people can tell the difference, certain CDs have things printed on to the actual disc that can't be emulated into information. I would hate to listen to Kid A on MP3s :ph34r:

I voted CDs.

[ScotchGuy]

Yeah, I suppose some people could tell the difference, luckily I am not one of them.

I just don't see how MP3's at 320 kbps (CD Quality) is any different from CD's, perhaps someone more learned on the subject can clarify.

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

Normal Audio CD's are encoded at 128 kbps, but as things chnage. The concept of much clear and transparent.

MP3s encoded at 320 kbps are same as listening to an audio CD. Can't really tell the difference.

I say, if you got money go for a smooth analog sound i.e. CDs they are great to listen to.

And if not get a nice MP3 encoded at atleast 128 kbps.

[Jet Set Willy]

Originally posted by Pornography@Nov 23 2003, 06:56 AM
A lot of people can tell the difference, certain CDs have things printed on to the actual disc that can't be emulated into information.
Not exactly. MP3 works by stripping 'inaudible' (that's a lie) frequencies from the final file. 320kbps is okay, really. It's hard to tell the difference on most speaker or headphone setups, and you'd really have to be looking for faults very much.

OGG is much better than MP3.

I like CDs, but I can't afford any.

[El Fugitivo]

I prefer CDs, as I like the tactile and visual experience of opening up the case, looking through the booklet, reading the lyrics, etc. In fact, If I'm at the store trying to decide between two CDs I want to buy, one of the most important features for me is how thick the CD booklet seems to be (by looking at it through the bottom edge of the case).


As far as mp3s go, I tend to think that under the right circumstances, they can sound as good as CDs if you're just passively listening to it. I wouldn't want to listen to more atmospheric music as mp3s (things that require a more active listen for me would be post-rock [Mogwai, Sigur Ros, Godspeed You Black Emperor], certain electronic artists [Boards Of Canada and Brian Eno especially], and other artists that incorporate higher than hi-fi elements in their music [Radiohead's the only band I can think of right now]). I don't mind mp3s for lo-fi stuff (Pavement, The Microphones, Heavy Vegetable) from an aural standpoint, but I do prefer CDs, as I said above, because of the whole experience, and also because I feel a need to own the things I like and support the people who create them.


I recently started the fairly large project of ripping all my CDs into mp3s so that when I do get a hardware mp3 player I will be able to fill it with music as soon as I open the box. I'm using EAC (alot of my CDs are incredibly scratched) to rip them, and LAME to encode the WAVs as mp3s (using the r3mix settings for 192kbps VBR quality). I am planning on testing ogg against mp3 once I get to my Kid A CD.

[Jet Set Willy]

I don't really know why everybody is using Kid A as a reference point. I remember most of the songs being quite lo-fi.

Fatboy Slim - California is a great reference track, and also Aphex Twin - 4.

[hitmonlee]

cds

i like the covers and stuff
having the official release
yeah

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

I made several Audio CDs myself. I had Sonic Foundry Sound Forge 7.0, and 100s of mp3s and CDRs and 100s of minutes of free time...

So I burned them and made my own Audio CDs, got the covers off the net and voila...A complete collection of songs...with not much of a difference from original CDs. As my Mp3s were 320 kbps transparent CD audio quality.

[Jet Set Willy]

MP3s are never CD quality. Just look at them in a spectrum analyser and you'll see.

[Codeine]

Originally posted by Waz@Nov 23 2003, 06:07 PM
I don't really know why everybody is using Kid A as a reference point. I remember most of the songs being quite lo-fi.

"Treefingers" is an ambient piece. "Kid A" (the song) sounds like crap on mp3.....and I don't have Motion Picture Soundtrack on mp3, but I imagine that a lot of them butcher the ending.

[Jet Set Willy]

...what makes you think that ambient music automatically needs to be encoded at a high quality? Often that's not the case, as there are no sharp sounds.

[Codeine]

Why does it need to have sharp sounds? I hate listening to ambient on mp3s. HATE IT. Thats why.

[Jet Set Willy]

No, I'm just saying, there's no technical reason that Kid A should be a special case regarding MP3s. It's all mostly lo-fi stuff and will do just fine at a decent bitrate.

[<><>]

I guess it really depends what you are listening to your music from.

If you have a high end HiFi System, you will see a considerable difference between MP3&#39;s encoded at any bitrate and CD&#39;s.

Ironically the major quality difference will come from the actual circuitry of the MP3 playback device rather than the raw data stream itself. There is a clear audible difference between a high end CD player and one you can get for a few bucks, so there is a clear difference between MP3 playback devices (the actual hardware and filtering) and a High quality CD player. Unofrtunately, HiFi producers will not touch high quality MP3 players with a ten foot pole. They think that high quality MP3 is an oxymoron.

As far as encoding goes, you could spak up a HUGE discussion on what bitrate, ABR, VBR, CBR what command line switches for LAME, what encoder version, what encoder compile, etc etc etc. HA forums is a clear sign of how everyone has a different taste and belief when it comes to encoding their music.

For me VBR is a no-brainer. I can hear the difference on my external sound card&#39;s output and on my portable mp3 player. I can clearly see the differnece in filesize too. I would like to see the iPod use OGG... he&#39;ll I&#39;ll even settle for the iPod using mp3cue so I can stop having that second long gap between songs or split the continiously mixed cd&#39;s I rip into segmented tracks... but that&#39;s not going to happen for a while.

If you&#39;re truly a lossless enthusiast you can FLAC&#39;it but I hope you are willing to spend some moolah on a RAID then (and cut down on your portable music library size in your pocket players).

[Jet Set Willy]

Hardware is certainly important. But really, with a normal sound card, a fairly decent pair of headphones and a headphone amp, MP3s really bite the skank&#39;s kneepads.

Unfortunately even if I could afford CDs, I wouldn&#39;t be able to find half of the releases I wanted, and I&#39;d never discover new artists and songs, so MP3s clearly have the advantage there - but that&#39;s not an explicit MP3 advantage, it&#39;s a file sharing advantage. If only more people would wise up to lossless formats. They&#39;re not THAT big...

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

Hardware is certainly important. But really, with a normal sound card, a fairly decent pair of headphones and a headphone amp, MP3s really bite the skank&#39;s kneepads.

I think my old Yamaha sound card gives me a fair advantage, with a pair of nice headphones and using DFX with Winamp.

[DanielW]

Originally posted by Waz@Nov 24 2003, 04:20 PM
If only more people would wise up to lossless formats. They&#39;re not THAT big...
Especially since broadband is becoming the norm nowadays.

[Zidane]

I would have to choose MP3"s for i get the song that i want without having to buy all the other songs that I didn&#39;t need.

[Mourgos]

In Greece cd piracy is a super huge illegal industry,so most greeks buy cds almost for free.Personally I prefer being illegal than being ripped off by the music industry.

[Badger]

On a cheap midi system, with limited equaliser functions, I really don&#39;t notice that much difference (if any) between Mp3 (even 128kbs) and CD.

On my own amp and speaker set up, I notice a large difference between mp3 and cd.

However for most lo-fi music I prefer vinyl. But don&#39;t have a decent record player, so it sounds a bit poo. My friend however does have a top notch record player and I just think music sounds so much better on it.

[Jet Set Willy]

Vinyl is much warmer, but too much of an inconvenience.

[El Fugitivo]

With some music, even sub-standard bitrates sound fine. I&#39;ve got a 96kbps mp3 of Nico&#39;s "These Days" from the Royal Tenenbaums soundtrack that sounds absolutely wonderful.

[Jet Set Willy]

MP3s have roughly the same effect as a low pass filter. If the music is already dulled enough (common with crunchy synth/organ stuff - "Everything in its Right Place" for example) then low bitrate MP3 is gonna be just fine, and only noticeable on infinite frequency sounds such as cymbal crashes.

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

I hate low bit rates, you cannot get a nice quality sound out of them.

My old Kumar Sanu songs are encoded at 56kbps and they just don&#39;t appear to play at all. No sound, I mean I hate the sound quality.

[Jet Set Willy]

I download a Phish song yesterday and it turned out to be encoded at 64kbps. Nasty.

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

You like VBR. I hate that too.

[<><>]

Why would you hate VBR? It only makes sense, at least in theory. Why encode at a constant bit rate while some portions of the music might be much simpler and cover a much narrower frequency band?

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

Simply because I hate it.

[Jet Set Willy]

&#39;cos he heard the term somewhere and decided to drop it in.

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

I have alot of MP3s encoded at variable bit rates and whenever i listen to them, there is a lack of something. I don&#39;t know what but its awful to hear.

[Codeine]

Surrrrre, Mr. Google.

Anyways, I can&#39;t really tell THAT much of a difference if I&#39;m playing a C.D on my speakers and an mp3 that are the exact same, because, my speakers are shite. And I am not playing them on my C.D player, they&#39;re even worse since the wires are all fucked up and they don&#39;t work sometimes. I need a great new sound system for my room, and conviently, Christmas is juust around the corner B)

[<><>]

Originally posted by M.H.A.Q.S.@Dec 3 2003, 10:38 PM
I have alot of MP3s encoded at variable bit rates and whenever i listen to them, there is a lack of something. I don&#39;t know what but its awful to hear.
That doesn&#39;t mean much about the encoding type. It could be the codec you are using, and/or the settings for VBR. VBR is a sensitive thing you know... it&#39;s like making love to a beautiful badger. First you got to make sure you have the right tools and then you have to &#39;turn and twist and bite&#39; the right nipples.. uh... knobs, to make sure you got everything set up just the way you want it. Ice cubes: check; hot wax: check; ben was balls: check; Lame encoder, with VBR --aps settings: ceck; Donna Summer&#39;s &#39;I love to love you&#39; check...

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

OK thanks.

[AngeloL]

I vote MP3s..
Why pay when u can get same quality for free?..MP3s at 320kbps are same quality as CDs that u buy from stores, I don&#39;t see the point. But then again maybe that&#39;s because I&#39;m such a cheapsk8 lol..

[Jet Set Willy]

No they&#39;re fucking not.

You&#39;d better start being less stupid, and start typing properly, or you&#39;ll be laughed out of here.

[Jay]

I voted for MP3&#39;s because there free. As far as ripping CD&#39;s and burning MP3&#39;s to CD goes, I don&#39;t know a lot about it. I just know that it works.

[M.H.A.Q.S.]

and start typing properly, or you&#39;ll be laughed out of here.

And the one to laugh most at you will be none other than....Who Was it?

[AngeloL]

Hey WazWaz, wtf is ur problem?&#33; I&#39;ve only been here a short while and I already can see dat u r a jerk. U have been pissin off da admins n shit. If u hate it so much, leave&#33; If u dun wanna hear my opinion, don&#39;t fuckin participate in a forum then. And it aint ur fukin business how i type stupid.

[ScotchGuy]

No, Waz makes a good point. Most of the people here type correctly, those that don&#39;t are looked down upon.

I know you&#39;re not so busy that you can&#39;t add a &#39;c&#39; and a &#39;g&#39; to "fukin". If you do type correctly you&#39;ll notice you sound more intelligent when you post.


Dat &#33;= Word

[El Fugitivo]

And what you said was not stated as an opinion, but a fact. A fact that was wrong. 320kbps MP3s are not the same quality as the audio files on CDs (cdda?).

[AngeloL]

Hey, why do you have to look down on ppl that don&#39;t type properly?..Is it really THAT annoying?&#33;..And NO. I don&#39;t sound more intelligent when I type properly because it still sounds the same when you read it loud.
Okay, it was a fact, but ScotchGuy and M.H.A.Q.S. themselves said it - that MP3s at 320kbps are EQUAL to CDs and that they couldn&#39;t tell no difference.
Dudes, whatever alright. Let&#39;s leave this here. And PLZ take that -1 pnts of my reputation.

[Lefteris_D]

320kbps MP3 and CD&#39;s are almost the same, you can hardly tell the difference.

A small tip, pay no attention to your reputation as most people here dont as well. We use it as a thing to play with mostly.
Using U instead of YOU and C instead of SEE does not make you stupid(unlike what some people told you) but I dont think you like using such "grammar" in your every day life. Are you?

[TGS]

It&#39;s "fucking".

[Jet Set Willy]

Originally posted by Lefteris_D@Jan 1 2004, 01:27 PM
320kbps MP3 and CD&#39;s are almost the same, you can hardly tell the difference.

Not on what you listen to them on and to your ears, maybe. I&#39;ve heard songs which don&#39;t sound right at all at any bitrate.

There is a direct correlation between stupidity and lack of grammar on the Internet, it&#39;s just those people are generally too stupid to realise.

[Lefteris_D]

I personally use 128kbps encoding for most of my files despite of it not being that good.

[belmont]

I prefer mp3.
Any bitrate over 118 is good.

[Jet Set Willy]

Eww, man, that&#39;s scraping the barrel.

[Codeine]

like fucking a man just &#39;cuz he has an asshole

[AngeloL]

No i don&#39;t use that grammer in real life&#33;..Im an ace at english

[Jet Set Willy]

Originally posted by AngeloL:
No i don&#39;t use that grammer in real life&#33;..Im an ace at english

That&#39;s why you typed grammar with an E in it, I suppose? What, is your E key quicker to press than your A key? Or are you actually a lying sheep with no grasp of the English language, making up for your incapabilities with blind insistence?

[AngeloL]

Shit.
Alright u told me there, but I wasn&#39;t lying bout how im good at english.

[Lefteris_D]

Can&#39;t you guys solve your issues privatelly(PM)? All you do is fight in every thread.

118kbps is crap btw.

[Jet Set Willy]

How the fuck is your post any less of a waste of space than anything I&#39;ve written in this thread, Lefteris?

[AngeloL]

Hey I never wanted to start any arguments or fights..it all comes out of other ppl being so negative.

[Lefteris_D]

Well, trying to stop a fight is less of a waste than keep it it up and running.

PLEASE continue this privatelly.

[ScotchGuy]

Originally posted by AngeloL@Jan 1 2004, 05:10 AM
Okay, it was a fact, but ScotchGuy and M.H.A.Q.S. themselves said it - that MP3s at 320kbps are EQUAL to CDs and that they couldn&#39;t tell no difference.
I never said 320 kbps was equal to the quality of CD&#39;s, I know it&#39;s not. I said it was good enough for me and I couldn&#39;t tell any difference. If I couldn&#39;t tell the difference between a man and woman that wouldn&#39;t necessarily mean there isn&#39;t one.

[suckthismeat]

I want to vote 8-track&#33;&#33;&#33;

[AngeloL]

Originally posted by ScotchGuy:
I say 320 kbps is equal to CD

Dude, you did say it.

[ScotchGuy]

Dude, don&#39;t call me dude, stupid twatbitch. Taken out of context sure I did, you fuckingtwatskankassbitchwhorefaggot.


Originally posted by Me:
I say 320 kbps is equal to CD. I can&#39;t tell the difference

Are you going to grow up to be a reporter or something? READ THE WHOLE FUCKING THING YOU STUPID FUCKING TWELVE YEAR OLD GIRL. You represent everything I hate about people.

Sorry, I get worked up when people accuse me of things, anything, even if it&#39;s something good.

[suckthismeat]

can anyone in here actually tell the difference between a 320k mp3 and a cd to start with?

and if so WHY CD&#39;s?
Why not the original un-fucked with analog (as digital is not "pure" in any sense) such as the good ol LP?

[El Fugitivo]

I can tell with some, but certainly not most, of my music. I do have some vinyl, but I don&#39;t listen to it much as my turntable and receiver are pieces of shit and need replacing.

[Jet Set Willy]

and if so WHY CD&#39;s
Why not the original un-fucked with analog (as digital is not "pure" in any sense) such as the good ol LP?

Because of the practical implications of vinyl and the fact that a lot of music is digital in origin anyway. Digital is pure, that&#39;s the point. It&#39;s quantized, which is what makes it horrible.

With a good set of headphones I can tell a 320kbps MP3 from a CD. I tried it in a blind test, listening to the MP3 and the CD in sequence, and then hitting a button to mark which I thought was which. I was right about 7/10 times. But yeah, for general indoor listening on normal equipment, 320kbps is just fine.

[suckthismeat]

how is DIGITAL PURE?

If nyone will reacall, most recording industries (at least they used to) use reel-to-reel at a very high speed to record the music - in analog.

Take and old LP of PinkFloyd&#39;s the wall, or Santana, and compare it with the "Digitally remastered" version - I can&#39;t listen to it. Its horrable.... The entire feel of the music is gone. It just isn&#39;t the same. And as someone else mentioned before - break out the o-scope and you will see the difference. Digital kills the sound, hell thats why tube amplifiers are making a come back, they seem to restore part of what digital leaves out.

for stupid stuff that I listen to all day mp3 (or simmilar) will do fine, but when it comes time that I want to "experience" the music, Analog.. but only with a good analog reciever...

[Jet Set Willy]

You&#39;re missing the point. I&#39;m was correcting your terminology.

A digital signal is entirely pure - it will always sound the same as the original digital signal under any circumstance. If you send a binary number digitally, it will always be the same number when it reaches the other end. That&#39;s what pure means. Certainly it won&#39;t be the same as the input if it&#39;s an analogue source, but that&#39;s a seperate issue.

What you&#39;re trying to say about analogue is that it is continuous, rather than discrete. Like I said, a digital signal is quantized, so there are jumps between samples and such. That&#39;s why a lot of people prefer analogue, including myself (but it&#39;s not practical, like I said). Analogue isn&#39;t as pure, as it is theoretically impossible to get it to produce the same output twice due to the methods required in &#39;reading&#39; the signal e.g. a needle reading vinyl won&#39;t produce the same results due to a host of physical variations and the destructive nature of the needle itself.

Not my diagram, but this is relevant:

http://www.dilettantesdictionary.com/defimages/quantization.gif

Please don&#39;t correct people when they&#39;re right, this is something I&#39;m interested in to a great depth, and it&#39;s insulting when you declare me wrong when I am not.

[ScotchGuy]

Yeah, Waz knows a lot on this subject, you can&#39;t step to this. Biznatch.

[suckthismeat]

And you know exactly what I meant when I said it was&#39;t a pure signal. So you can stop taking what people say too literally

[Jet Set Willy]

A spade is a spade. Pure is pure. This conversation was educational and not at all pointless. Perhaps next time you talk about the advantages of an analogue recording you&#39;ll use the word "natural" instead of pure.

[suckthismeat]

ok, so "natural" it is