"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
jamesgangnc wrote:
Without any compression? Are you sure about that. Cause the lossless
formats only achieve about a 70% reduction in file size so you get
around 2 cds or so per gig. Default ripping with itunes uses the
apple acc compression which is a lossy algorythm. Mp3 is also lossy.
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
Like this:
http://www.alteclansing.com/index.ph...iproduct_id=64
or:
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/iHome...oductDetail.do
The heir to my fortune and empire is apparently enamored of these
toys. Interested in feedback if you've got something like this. I
think it's a mistake and that a guy should have an actual stereo
system, even if this means getting rid of his roommate to make
space in the dorm room. The prince doesn't agree.
The 'kids' are hoked on the iPods or reasonable facimilie.
No point fighting it.
My son has had one for a couple of years , and asked for a new model
this Christmas. Of course his mom ran right out and plopped down
$400.00 + taxes for it.
It was a lot cheaper back in the days of the old 45s.
If we eliminate HD radio from the discussion for the moment, an iPod
is probably no worse than listening to FM radio, which munges up the
music to an extent. My son's at least using music files pulled
directly from CDs for the most part, without any compression that
he's applied. So, at least he's not at the mercy of radio stations.
But then, he's listening with earbuds, which suck, according to my
ears. I offered to get him a set of nice Sennheiser 400-series open
air headphones, but he's not interested.
He's always right, ya know?
MP4 320 kbps
Still lossy. I haven't found anyone that could really tell the
difference though. The problem comes in when you want to switch formats
from one lossy to another lossy. That's why it's always better to go
back to the original uncompressed source. Also why I very seldom buy
music off itunes, because then you never get a copy of the uncompressed
song.
At the "better settings", it's difficult to tell the difference. And,
whether it matters or not often depends on the purpose of the file you're
creating. If I need to send a song to a band member, to settle the "Are
we talking about the same song here?" question, and he's one of these
people whose email is always close to fill, I'll shrink a 15mb song down
to 1mb. It sounds hideous, but at least I get the answer I'm looking for.
If I have to listen to that same song on my stereo every day for a week,
while learning it, then it has to be the original or very close to it.
Otherwise, it grates on my nerves.
Ok, so what settings are you considering close to the original? And what
equipment do you run it through?
I'm using just 256kb mp4 and running it through a dbx223 crossover set at
700hz driving an adcom 555 amp for the woofers and an adcom 535 amp for
the midbass and ribbon tweeters. And I can't really tell any difference
between the uncompressed and the mp4.
I have WMP set to rip tracks to what it calls Windows Media Lossless. I
listen through a Hafler preamp (forgot model #), Hafler DH-200 power amp and
a pair of Kef IQ-9 speakers. It's inconvenient and time consuming for me to
try and compare the CDs I make to the originals (take out one CD, put in
another blah blah blah), but I've experimented with the bit rates in a
program called EZ CD Extractor (
http://www.poikosoft.com/) which, among
other things, can take a track on your computer and compress it with a wide
range of settings. There *IS* a point where I notice the beginnings of
harshness, listening with a very nice set of Sennheiser headphones.
I won't mention the bit rate where I notice the loss of quality, because it
would result in "someone" adding a lot of clutter to this discussion.