Ugh! MP3s Sound Like Garbage!

[Resident Loser]

...May I remind those interested, audio was all DIY/high end in it's early days...hobbyists who were interested in better performance than that which could be had from the garden-variety Victrola or console...Even in mono, it was always a niche group that considered itself above the mass produced/marketed "furniture"...

And college? Dorms? I shared a room with my brother and took mass-transit to CUNY...My "stereo" was a mono GE record player that was obtained with Plaid Stamps...

jimHJJ(...it was the music that mattered...)

[Woochifer]

Sorry Woochifer, the high end was around in the early 80's. Back then I was using an ARC SP3 preamp and Maggy MG-1's. They were considered high end. As a matter of fact the HQD (stacked Quads, Decca ribbon tweeters with a Hartley sub woofer) system driven by Mark Levinson electronics was the highest of the high end.

By vinyl heyday, I was not referring to the early-80s. By that time, the prerecorded cassette had already surpassed the LP in unit sales, and the CD introduction was imminent.

My contention is simply that there's a helluva lotta audiophile yearning for the good ole days, and pointing to the dominance of the LP in an earlier time as some kind of proof that consumers back then cared more about sound quality. But, the reality is that most LPs were played through cheap and crappy sounding record players (many of which used those gawdawful stack spindles for continuous play), and that's no different from today where you got many more consumers that use mini-systems or computer-based systems than component-based systems. Given a choice between those typical record changers and a computer-based system playing MP3, I'll take the latter straight up for sound quality, and consider the conveniences (i.e. instant access to music collection, no flipping of records, no cleaning/maintenance, etc.) as a bonus.

[Mike Anderson]

I'm with Wooch on this all the way.

It's simply silly to claim consumers are getting screwed when you can get a gizmo like the iPod for a few hundred bucks or less. Anybody with half a brain would've given their left nut for something like that back in the '80s.

And in terms of pure sound quality, dollar-for-dollar it's never been cheaper. Stop and think about how much scratch you'd have spent in the '70s trying to get the degree of quality you can get today for a couple thousand bucks. No comparison.

[Resident Loser]

By vinyl heyday, I was not referring to the early-80s. By that time, the prerecorded cassette had already surpassed the LP in unit sales, and the CD introduction was imminent.

My contention is simply that there's a helluva lotta audiophile yearning for the good ole days, and pointing to the dominance of the LP in an earlier time as some kind of proof that consumers back then cared more about sound quality. But, the reality is that most LPs were played through cheap and crappy sounding record players (many of which used those gawdawful stack spindles for continuous play), and that's no different from today where you got many more consumers that use mini-systems or computer-based systems than component-based systems. Given a choice between those typical record changers and a computer-based system playing MP3, I'll take the latter straight up for sound quality, and consider the conveniences (i.e. instant access to music collection, no flipping of records, no cleaning/maintenance, etc.) as a bonus.

...just another appliance, just pop it in like bread in a toaster...don't get me wrong...I'm quite happy with my Target CDs and my Sears GPX player($7USD after rebate) and my $5USD Koss 'phones from Wal-mart...simply convenient and it's the music that matters...and with all that extra time on your hands, you can sit in Starbucks drinking overpriced coffee...

jimHJJ(...whilst Wi-Fi-ing...)

[jrhymeammo]

Anybody with half a brain would've given their left nut for something like that back in the '80s.

And in terms of pure sound quality, dollar-for-dollar it's never been cheaper. Stop and think about how much scratch you'd have spent in the '70s trying to get the degree of quality you can get today for a couple thousand bucks. No comparison.

I'm so happy that I was born in 1979.

[PeruvianSkies]

Ok...may I ask another quick question? I am not sure if this has been addressed directly, indirectly, or not at all, so i'll ask this...

How do I retain maximum quality when I take a Redbook CD place it into my computer and make a copy from it or play it from the computer? I use iTunes currently as my computer player since I have a Mac computer. I typically use the Apple Lossless when I transfer the tracks from the disc onto my computer...is that the best? Also, when I burn it to a CD-R should I change any settings? Is there any alternative software that I should be aware of that could do this process better for Mac??? Any help would be awesome!

[basite]

maybe, not sure, (almost sure) but if space is no matter, copy the disc to your hard drive by making an image of it (.iso, .mdf/mds,...) in this way, it's like really copying a disc, only you don't copy it to another cd, but to your hard drive.

i must warn you though, if you have never worked with images of any kind, this is a very difficult method, and it is a really big file (700 mb MAX)

[Feanor]

Ok...may I ask another quick question? I am not sure if this has been addressed directly, indirectly, or not at all, so i'll ask this...

How do I retain maximum quality when I take a Redbook CD place it into my computer and make a copy from it or play it from the computer? I use iTunes currently as my computer player since I have a Mac computer. I typically use the Apple Lossless when I transfer the tracks from the disc onto my computer...is that the best? Also, when I burn it to a CD-R should I change any settings? Is there any alternative software that I should be aware of that could do this process better for Mac??? Any help would be awesome!

My experience is that Apple Lossless is practically indistinguishable from CD, (or WAV). I rip CDs using iTunes on my Windows XP machine to this format with "Error correction" set to 'ON', not that I've necessarily noticed a difference.

Other alternatives to ripping the CD that I've looked at, e.g. Exact Audio Copy, (EAC), are much less convenient to use, especially if iTunes is your library and player as is the case for me.

I occassionally have compter playback glitches. These are what I call "dropouts" that arise -- I suspect -- from the data stream not getting to the sound card on time. They sound very much like vinyl clicks & pops! So if you're nostalgic for vinyl ...

I doubt that they are the result of problems in the recording process, but I'm not entirely sure. To aleviate the problem, if you're a Windows XP user at least, I suggest minimizing the number of programs running while you're recording or playing; not only programs you initiate yourself but also unnecessary Start Up programs and Registry-initiated programs and services. But don't mess with this stuff unless you know what you're doing or have good advice.

[Mike Anderson]

My experience is that Apple Lossless is practically indistinguishable from CD, (or WAV). I rip CDs using iTunes on my Windows XP machine to this format with "Error correction" set to 'ON', not that I've necessarily noticed a difference.

If it's really lossless, it should be 100% indistinguishable from the CD, ripping errors aside. With a true lossless format, you can convert back to the original PCM stream bit-for-bit (which is precisely what the player does). In fact that's one way to prove it's really lossless.

Note that Apple's error correction is comparatively weak. You won't run into problems very often, but once in a blue moon you'll get a poor quality or damaged disk, and the resulting song will end up with clicks or skips in it.

[noddin0ff]

I rip to Apple Lossless with the error correction 'on'. In my opinion, you'd need a golden ear to hear the difference.

There's a free program for the Mac called Max (here's the clicky). It probably has the best error free ripping options available for free on a Mac. Plus it converts to just about any format you could want.

I haven't tried it yet. It requires OS 10.4 or higher. (I'm on 10.3.9)

[Feanor]

If it's really lossless, it should be 100% indistinguishable from the CD, ripping errors aside. With a true lossless format, you can convert back to the original PCM stream bit-for-bit (which is precisely what the player does). In fact that's one way to prove it's really lossless.

Note that Apple's error correction is comparatively weak. You won't run into problems very often, but once in a blue moon you'll get a poor quality or damaged disk, and the resulting song will end up with clicks or skips in it.

I'm really not clear whether the skips I hear are caused durying rip or playback. The determination is difficult because most often playbacks are flawless or virtually so. In any case I suspect problems lies elsewhere than Apple's compression algorythm; all files that regularly cause playback glitches were made from apparently unblemished discs.

And I have created CDs from Apple Lossless files on one or two occassions. As you say, they are practically (or entirely) indistinguishable from the originals.

[Mike Anderson]

I'm really not clear whether the skips I hear are caused durying rip or playback. The determination is difficult because most often playbacks are flawless or virtually so. In any case I suspect problems lies elsewhere than Apple's compression algorythm; all files that regularly cause playback glitches were made from apparently unblemished discs.

It's the ripping (and the imperfect error correction in the ripping process) that causes clicks or skips.

Lossless compression will NOT change the sound in any fashion. Lossy compression will create certain artifacts, but not clicks or skips, generally speaking (unless it's an amazingly bad algorithm).

And playback shouldn't produce clicks or skips either, unless there's something wrong with your setup.

Sometimes even perfect-looking disks can cause problems, perhaps because of the way they were burned. It's very rare though.

If I have time when I get home tonight, I will try to post a clip online to demonstrate what I'm talking about. It's quite audible.

[Woochifer]

I'm with Wooch on this all the way.

It's simply silly to claim consumers are getting screwed when you can get a gizmo like the iPod for a few hundred bucks or less. Anybody with half a brain would've given their left nut for something like that back in the '80s.

And in terms of pure sound quality, dollar-for-dollar it's never been cheaper. Stop and think about how much scratch you'd have spent in the '70s trying to get the degree of quality you can get today for a couple thousand bucks. No comparison.

No kidding! Even though Walkmans throughout the 80s kept getting smaller and smaller, consumers were still limited by the number of cassette tapes that they could physically carry with them, and the performance limitations of the cassette format itself.

Maybe I wouldn't have traded my left nut for something like an iPod back then! But, certainly a device that allows me to carry my entire music collection with me with audio quality at least as good as a cassette tape would have been of great interest to me and just about everybody else I knew who owned a Walkman. (Is it any wonder that the MP3 player market is more than triple the size of the audio component market?)

As for other parts of the audio market, all you have to do is inflation adjust the prices for vintage audio components and compare that with what you could buy today. My parents' receiver was a Marantz 2275. A very nice sounding receiver that sold for $600 back in 1976. Those same dollars today would be worth over $2,100 -- just think about how much two-channel amplification you could buy with that kind of a budget?

$600 was about what I paid for my 5.1 receiver five years ago. I would say that my parents' Marantz has a somewhat more refined sound than my Yamaha, but the functionality of the newer receiver is far superior AND it can do multichannel. In the greater scheme of things, I'm perfectly willing to trade off a little bit of refinement on the two-channel side for the array of new capabilities that my 5.1 receiver provides. And the market seems to share in that view. If I chose to pay $2,100 for a receiver combination today, I would think that I could bump up the two-channel performance to even surpass that of my parents' Marantz.

[Resident Loser]

In the greater scheme of things, I'm perfectly willing to trade off a little bit of refinement on the two-channel side for the array of new capabilities that my 5.1 receiver provides. And the market seems to share in that view...

...Wooch...but the "market" wasn't really given much of a choice was it?

And now you also have the potential for having your entire audio collection disappear in a classic "Oh $h!t!!!" moment...but then again, most of today's music is as disposable as the hardware it's played on...

jimHJJ(...iPod's just another appliance...)

[Feanor]

It's the ripping (and the imperfect error correction in the ripping process) that causes clicks or skips.
...
And playback shouldn't produce clicks or skips either, unless there's something wrong with your setup.

Sometimes even perfect-looking disks can cause problems, perhaps because of the way they were burned. It's very rare though.

....

I reripped some track where I had experienced clicks or skips. As before I used iTunes and specified Apple Lossless with error correction. On playback I heard no clicks or skips. Presumably something was different either in the ripping or playback. The only difference I can think of is that I was running no other programs on my slowish laptop during either process.

It's worth noting that I tested the CD with Exact Audio Copy; EAC reported no errors on the relevant tracks. So I would surmise that the error correction during the rip was not the culprit since there were no errors to correct. My main suspect remains insufficient buffering of the data stream during rip, playback, or both, that, when combined with multiple tasks running on the computer, is the cause of these artifacts. In particular, I think it's most likely during the ripping where the actual problem is being created. That's because one can't control the buffer size for the rip in iTunes, but one can for for playback for my M-Audio external sound card where I have it set to the maximum value.

[ericl]

I had this lovely conversation over in a Mac forum...
http://forums.dealmac.com/read.php?4...621431#2621431

But, yeah, bitrate matters.

LOL, Noddinoff, you were in fine form in that thread. Good Show!

[SlumpBuster]

Okay, after living with my new MP3 player for a week I have to unfortunately issue what may be termed a retraction, or at least a mea culpa.

First off, MP3's do not sound like garbage, my MP3 players DAC/amplifier(?) sounds like garbage. What do you call that little dingleberry of headphone jack anyway? I guess it's an amp? Actually, it is fine with earbuds, but was lacking when I used my over-the-ear Sennheiser cans or plugged it into my receiver.

Probably half my CD collection is ripped onto my computer at 256 and 192 in MP3, but I never hooked it up to a proper system. I just kinda ripped it figuring I would want it all there someday. Well it sounds pretty good through an 80's vintage Akai reciever, Infinity/Boston Acoustic FrankenSpeaker, and whatever soundcard Dell throws in when you click the button for upgraded sound when you order it.

Which comes to an important learning lesson on my part regarding new formats and being somewhat of a crumudgeon. I thought the trend of adding USB ports to receivers was just trendy marketing. "Why not just use a Y-splitter?" I thought. But now I get it! Not only am I bypassing the MP3 player's DAC and headphone amp, but the USB is supply power to the player. Frankly, it was a real "Duh" moment. All the MP3 player is is a fancy flash drive. Like I said "Duh."


Combine that with the convienence offered by MP3s and I think I just figured out what apparently everyone else already knew: These digital music players ain't too shabby. The conveinence is outrageous. Each morning before work this week, I hit a couple mouseclicks and the player is randomly loaded with a day and a half of music. Pretty sweet. Plus the random/freeform thing is a bonus.

I mean just as I was writing this I got Basement Jax; Cub; The Killers; the Bee Gees; ChixDigIt!; Belly; Bedouin Soundclash; and Snoop Dogg. Find me a radio station that does that.

Slump "I must sound like a real grandpa/gomer" Buster

[jrhymeammo]

I'm not getting you here Slumpy. How are you bypassing the players DAC? I guess my Ipod really suck. I can't play music by using USB.

[SlumpBuster]

I'm not getting you here Slumpy. How are you bypassing the players DAC? I guess my Ipod really suck. I can't play music by using USB.

I'm just bypassing the DAC by using the USB output/input. USB just moves around data bits on a hot swap input. I don't have an Ipod, but I just looked and they all appear to be USB compatable. I assume to need a proprietary Apple USB cord though. Maybe you have an old Ipod? Smarter people than me probably know.

[jrhymeammo]

See that;s the thing, I see products like I-Dock by Denon. Does that device has its own DAC? Cuz I thought by using USB you are just senfing digital signals. Maybe I guess I'll findout when I get that package from Denon for winning that contest. I'll be waiting even in my death bed.

I have a white Nano 4G

-RJA

[jrhymeammo]

Oh I forgot, I also have a Ipod Mini 6G. It's PINK. I found it at school one day, and turned it in to Lost and Found Office. But now, it's mine. It's pretty hot,

[SlumpBuster]

I got mine to use while doing yard work. This must be what the pink ones are for.

http://tehgay.ytmnd.com/

[jrhymeammo]

I never got paid for that........ WHERE:S MY MONEY MAN!!!!!!!!!!!

[Resident Loser]

I mean just as I was writing this I got Basement Jax; Cub; The Killers; the Bee Gees; ChixDigIt!; Belly; Bedouin Soundclash; and Snoop Dogg. Find me a radio station that does that.

...but why would I want to? ;-p

jimHJJ(...I mean maybe the Bee Gees...and even that would be the older stuff...)

[Woochifer]

...Wooch...but the "market" wasn't really given much of a choice was it?

Choice? Yes and no. Some manufacturers and resellers were slower than others in adapting to the entry of multichannel formats into the market. Nearly all of the retailers in my area that doggedly chose to stick with two-channel components are no longer around. The market spoke loud and clear in those cases. In the mass market, some companies lead, others follow. But, the net result of that process and the resultant aggregate "choices" that consumers consciously made seems to indicate that multichannel is the choice made more often than not.

And now you also have the potential for having your entire audio collection disappear in a classic "Oh $h!t!!!" moment...but then again, most of today's music is as disposable as the hardware it's played on...

jimHJJ(...iPod's just another appliance...)

Just as some people don't like to wear seat belts, some daredevils like to go without a net, and others use computers with no backups, you got yet some other people who don't backup their music collections. (Of course, if you ever use iTunes, you'd know that the default mode copies downloaded and ripped music onto your computer hard drive first before it gets sync'd to the iPod. Would be kinda hard to lose an entire music collection unless the iPod and hard drive both fail at the same time, or you consciously choose to delete the music libraries on your hard drive.)

Well, every generation's music is considered disposable until the next generation's "disposable" music comes, and then the previously annointed "disposable" music is reannointed as indispensible.

And today's disposable hardware occupies (in real dollar terms) the same market price points as yesterday's disposable hardware. I mean, how many BSR record changers, or GE portable record players, or Panasonic 8-track players (which in real dollar terms cost about the same as an iPod Shuffle) do you see in use today? The Superscope compact system I had as a teenager cost $300 in 1980, which is more in real dollars than what I paid for my receiver six years ago -- my receiver has lasted longer and sounds a lot better.

Of course, the passage of time ensures that in 100 years that a new-in-box 1st gen iPod will be considered an antique collectible at a Sotheby's auction, and "classic" hip-hop will be dissected at length by music historians around the world.