Better Quality
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=103274
Printed Date: August 13 2025 at 11:27 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Better Quality
Posted By: justin4950834-2
Subject: Better Quality
Date Posted: July 14 2015 at 19:03
This thread is a little different than what your used to. Its about trying to get the best sound quality out of older prog or any music, at least for me anyways. I'll explain myself a little more.
So when I listen to music I always use Itunes. I have a 180gb Ipod Classic and I have all my music on there. Most of the time I import my music with CDs because the music on the Itunes store is too highly compressed. Recently I just read an article about importing CDs in better quality by using Apple Lossless (320 kbps). Ive always used the default setting (128 kbps). The article said that Apple Lossless is the best quality you can import your CDs in. So here's what I did, I took one of my favorite albums, Close to the Edge and imported it in Apple Lossless. I listened to it and heard some sounds I haven't really noticed before, but they weren't pleasant sounds. Right after the crazy intro you can hear rick wakemans really high pitched organ a lot more and it was over modulating. Its really hard to explain the exact sound quality, but it sounded more like a gritty live recording than a crisp studio recording. Maybe the Apple Lossless is meant for a newer CD that didn't have to be remastered. Older music is meant to be compressed a little because well, its old.
I guess I'm just looking for the best way to import your CDs into Itunes. Any help would be much appreciated.
|
Replies:
Posted By: CryoftheCarrots
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 00:39
I have the same ipod classic as you and always use 320 kbps. Bigger file size but I still haven't filled it.You know you can alter the EQ in settings although it doesn't have a progrock EQ setting. 
------------- "There is a lot in this world to be tense and intense about"
MJK
|
Posted By: Meltdowner
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 03:50
128 kbps is not a decent setting in terms of quality. If I had a MP3 player with that capacity I would import my CDs on FLAC, but I think the IPod don't support the format... my 1GB player read those though, I can only have two albums at a time there
|
Posted By: PrognosticMind
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 04:13
^FLAC is preferred, but not always practical for certain devices as you mention .
I just try my best to make up for it with a good pair of headphones and as high a rip as possible within practicality.
------------- "A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous. Got me?"
|
Posted By: Intruder
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 05:01
Kbps, mp3, FLCA. Man, somebody speak English! This old war horse still plays his LPs on good old Japanese components....I even thought my cd player was a compromise of sound for convenience.
------------- I like to feel the suspense when you're certain you know I am there.....
|
Posted By: Meltdowner
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 05:19
^ MP3 and FLAC are compression formats for audio files: the first loses quality in order to occupy less memory and the second is lossless so the files are much bigger. Kbps, I'll just say it's a quality measure: higher kbps values mean higher quality
|
Posted By: Meltdowner
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 05:26
PrognosticMind wrote:
^FLAC is preferred, but not always practical for certain devices as you mention .
| I don't use it often, so most of the times two albums are enough
|
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 06:08
The idea that Apple calls any kind of MP3 "Lossless" is rediculous, but then it's Apple.
I always rip CD's on my PC with Windows Media Player and set it at 320kbs, not perfect but good enough for an MP3 player, sounds like this Apple Lossless thing didn't work so well so I'd try going by this method. I also have a decent pair of ear buds to go with, in my case I use Senheissers.
------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 11:45
If you take your CD which plays lossless and rip it using mp3 setting or some other lossy format..the result will be a degradation in sound quality and essentially missing some of the music. A mp3 file at 320kbps is missing some info from the CD. The whole point is to allow the music player to fit more music, but at a lower bit rate which decreases sound quality. For sure if you compared a 128kbps file to a 320kbps file, you SHOULD hear more information.
320kbps files are fine for all your mobile devices, I would not rip to 128kbps anything....192kbps would be the minimum, understanding though that you are not hearing all the music. It's not meant for critical listening...
So it means instead of 3,000 songs on your player, maybe you only can fit 2,000 songs.....If that is a problem then stick with 128kbps.
-------------
|
Posted By: octopus-4
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 12:13
I have an android tabllet with a MicroSD slot and I always carry 3 of them of 64Gb each... And everytime there's something that I'd like to listen to and is not on any of the three....
------------- I stand with Roger Waters, I stand with Joan Baez, I stand with Victor Jara, I stand with Woody Guthrie. Music is revolution
|
Posted By: justin4950834-2
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 14:08
This really sucks because Ive always used the default setting for importing and now I got 9000 songs that are all in 128 kbps. It will take forever to import all my CDs again.
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 14:14
....forever and a day 
-------------
|
Posted By: tboyd1802
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 17:42
justin4950834-2 wrote:
This really sucks because Ive always used the default setting for importing and now I got 9000 songs that are all in 128 kbps. It will take forever to import all my CDs again.
|
Yep, I feel your pain - went through the same process myself
I don't know if you have much classical music in your library, but if you are re-ripping your CDs, you may also want to think about fixing the Gracenote metadata that gets connected to the tracks. The default metadata is nonsensical for classical music. Who in their right mind would search for music by Mozart under "A" for Amadeus!!
------------- He neither drank, smoked, nor rode a bicycle. Living frugally, saving his money, he died early, surrounded by greedy relatives. It was a great lesson to me -- John Barrymore
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 17:44
Catcher10 wrote:
If you take your CD which plays lossless and rip it using mp3 setting or some other lossy format..the result will be a degradation in sound quality and essentially missing some of the music. A mp3 file at 320kbps is missing some info from the CD. The whole point is to allow the music player to fit more music, but at a lower bit rate which decreases sound quality.For sure if you compared a 128kbps file to a 320kbps file, you SHOULD hear more information.
320kbps files are fine for all your mobile devices, I would not rip to 128kbps anything....192kbps would be the minimum, understanding though that you are not hearing all the music. It's not meant for critical listening...
So it means instead of 3,000 songs on your player, maybe you only can fit 2,000 songs.....If that is a problem then stick with 128kbps. |
Shame on you Catch, for not mentioning vinyl.
|
Posted By: JD
Date Posted: July 15 2015 at 18:20
One word...Pono
That's Neil Young's new player and it plays FLAC file among others. I'm lead to believe it's the Audiophile's version of an iPod. A little expensive up front but it sound like an alternative. The bigger question is what's it's played through. Most of the earbuds I've heard suck at best, so unless someone comes up with a smaller studio quality set of cans that will always be the limiting factor. My AKG K240's come with a mini plug that you can plug into these types of devices but I've never had the occasion to try it.
------------- Thank you for supporting independently produced music
|
Posted By: AEProgman
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 08:06
I would say a good alternative to the Pono is some of the FiiO players, you get more bang for your buck. The Pono player is $399, while you can get pretty descent, more versatile players from FiiO (other vendors also).
Just getting into the higher quality world over the past year after years of bad quality audio. I just got the FiiO X1 for $99. It plays most all the hi-res file types and you can use your own memory cards. I use some over the ear descent quality cans, Audio-Technica ATH-M40X headphones. Sounds great, but even better when I use the line out feature into a headphone amp!
The issue I see now is not a big selection of hi-res music available...yet. The Pono site has some hi-res albums, but a lot of CD quality digital files. HDTracks seems to have a better selection of hi-res stuff and the website is easier to search through than Pono.
Most of my CD rips are 320 or 256. A question for anyone, is it worth the effort to rip CDs to FLAC or is 320kb MP3 as good?
-------------
|
Posted By: RockHound
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 08:31
I maintain two libraries - one for my iPhone, and the other for the home theater. For the iPhone, I use the iTunes default, which is now 256 kbps AAC and provides very good sound quality - you need very good equipment, a clean original recording, and a keen ear to tell the difference from a lossless codec. For the home theater I use Apple Lossless, which faithfully reproduces the original CD - it is effectively equivalent to FLAC. iTunes downloads are now 256 kbps, so the quality is very good, provided the original source is decent.
128 kbps is extremely lossy, although a good recording engineer can make an excellent recording at this bitrate. That being the exception rather than the rule, compressing your CDs to 128 kbps typically results in annoying degradation of audio quality.
Another key to getting good sound quality out of an iPod or iPhone is choosing a quality set of earphones. Indeed, a home stereo rises or falls depending on the speakers you choose, and the same goes for mobile audio. Some prefer sound isolating earphones, whereas others use noise canceling headphones. The pressure changes associated with noise canceling tech drive me crazy and, IMHO, do not give an audiophile experience. Others swear by noise canceling. I have been very happy with the Sure 535 isolating earphones, which benefit from dual bass drivers and a rounded high end above 16 khz that helps protect your hearing (very important). Other great choices include several models by Ultimate Ears (custom fit earphones that include professional studio monitors) and Etymotic Research (wide range of quality offerings), among others.
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 16 2015 at 12:00
AEProgman wrote:
I would say a good alternative to the Pono is some of the FiiO players, you get more bang for your buck. The Pono player is $399, while you can get pretty descent, more versatile players from FiiO (other vendors also).
Just getting into the higher quality world over the past year after years of bad quality audio. I just got the FiiO X1 for $99. It plays most all the hi-res file types and you can use your own memory cards. I use some over the ear descent quality cans, Audio-Technica ATH-M40X headphones. Sounds great, but even better when I use the line out feature into a headphone amp!
The issue I see now is not a big selection of hi-res music available...yet. The Pono site has some hi-res albums, but a lot of CD quality digital files. HDTracks seems to have a better selection of hi-res stuff and the website is easier to search through than Pono.
Most of my CD rips are 320 or 256. A question for anyone, is it worth the effort to rip CDs to FLAC or is 320kb MP3 as good? |
At home, just play your CDs so you hear all the music. When going mobile then I think 320kbps is fine in any format. It will not be as good as your FLAC rips because you will be missing pcs of the music, due to truncating or "dumbing down" the original CD. You miss hearing the tiny tid bits of music that give you the fullness, you miss for example piano and cymbal decay, with lossy files those little tidbits end abruptly.
But again, mobile devices should not be used for critical listening nor graded that way, they are meant for going mobile with earbuds that for the most part are not the best sounding, overly bass driven IMO.
But having these devices has made plane travel so much more tolerable today....That's the good thing!
-------------
|
Posted By: Siloportem
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 02:37
I have one flac library and reripping everything to flacs was an awful lot of work. I doubt anyone can hear the difference between lossy and lossless in a noisy mobile environment.
By the way iPods do support a lossless format, it's called alac (apple lossless) and as far as I can tell it's basically flac with an extra shell. The only program I ever found that could encode them was called music bee. But if you insist on real lossless on an ipod then that's the way to go.
These days I use an iBasso DX50 which has great sound quality and horrible everything else. But I'm used to having everything else at ipod quality level so go figure.
------------- Thanks !! Your topics always so good and informative. I like you talk.
|
Posted By: Barbu
Date Posted: July 17 2015 at 06:34
|