- Jul 30, 2003
- 3,667
- 1
- 0
Ripped everything over 140kbps MP3, to 160kbps AAC shrunk from 11gbs to 10gbs. Just ripped everythin 140 and under to 128kbps AAC, and it shrunk another GB.
Awesome
Awesome
AAC pwns MP3
- Thread starter newParadigm
- Start date
FLAC pwns AAC.
Lossless, so you can listen with true CD quality, then transcode as often as you want to lossy formats if you need them for a portable player or car CD.
Disk space is cheap, the 298 GB I've used for 947 of my CDs (so far) can be had for $100 with Hot Deals.
Lossless, so you can listen with true CD quality, then transcode as often as you want to lossy formats if you need them for a portable player or car CD.
Disk space is cheap, the 298 GB I've used for 947 of my CDs (so far) can be had for $100 with Hot Deals.
- Jul 30, 2003
- 3,667
- 1
- 0
:laugh: and $10 says he thinks they sound better now on stock pod buds
Oh and yes, flac > ogg > *
blurredvision
Lifer
- Oct 19, 2000
- 17,860
- 4
- 81
I wish you guys on Anandtech would just understand that a lot of us here aren't completely anal about our music. Who gives a sh!t that one file format is "lossy", and who cares if he wants to go from "lossy" to "lossy"? If he can't tell the difference, then your arguement completely goes out the window.
I personally think my AAC tracks from iTunes sounds great on the comp or in the car, regardless of what kind of format it is. I just feel sorry for those of you who can tell a difference, as you are much more pressured to get your music "just right", as us who can't tell or could care less just burn a cd and go.
Converting like that causes a bigger loss of quality than you'd get from ripping at that data rate to begin with. I don't see how it's worth the couple gigs.
I listen to FM radio and to Napster 128 kbps WMA as well as my precioussss FLAC CDs. I also filled up my Zen Xtra with 250 CDs of the FLACs transcoded to 192 kbps MP3. So the goodness of FLAC is not just for snobs who can only stand to listen to true CD quality.
I rip my CDs to FLAC because disk space is cheap, it sounds great when listening through the Polk bookshelf speakers in my home office, I can transcode to any other format without extra lossy-to-lossy quality loss, and it acts as a true backup of my CD collection.
Since lossless is true CD quality I also know there will never be a need to re-rip my CD collection ever again, unless both the music server drives and the backup set of drives in the closet both die simultaneously.
I rip my CDs to FLAC because disk space is cheap, it sounds great when listening through the Polk bookshelf speakers in my home office, I can transcode to any other format without extra lossy-to-lossy quality loss, and it acts as a true backup of my CD collection.
Since lossless is true CD quality I also know there will never be a need to re-rip my CD collection ever again, unless both the music server drives and the backup set of drives in the closet both die simultaneously.
- Jul 30, 2003
- 3,667
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Gurck
:laugh: and $10 says he thinks they sound better now on stock pod buds
Oh and yes, flac > ogg > *
umm, i acutally have senheiser pmx60 headphones, and Philip noise canceling earbuds. Soo
Most who claim not to care about sound quality have simply never had the good fortune to hear a good setup. What happens if he takes an interest in quality at some point?
Quality sound is like a chain; only as good as its weakest link. Your source is an ipod.Originally posted by: newParadime
umm, i acutally have senheiser pmx60 headphones, and Philip noise canceling earbuds. SooOriginally posted by: Gurck
:laugh: and $10 says he thinks they sound better now on stock pod buds
Oh and yes, flac > ogg > *
Originally posted by: newParadime
Originally posted by: Gurck
:laugh: and $10 says he thinks they sound better now on stock pod buds
Oh and yes, flac > ogg > *
umm, i acutally have senheiser pmx60 headphones, and Philip noise canceling earbuds. Soo
Noise cancelling ear buds? Do you travel in airplanes a lot?
Right, except if you ever get the chance to listen to a decent setup, you will go to sleep that day wondering where you can get something like that for a decent price.
JUST LIKE COMPUTERS! OMFGWTFBBQ..
yukichigai
Diamond Member
- Apr 23, 2003
- 6,404
- 0
- 76
Apples and Oranges, folks. FLAC is a truly awesome lossless codec, but Ogg Vorbis isn't lossless and wasn't developed to be lossless.
As far as the quality:bitrate ratio goes, it's hard to say. AAC and Ogg Vorbis are relatively close, as are Musepack, APE, and a handful of others. But for me, Vorbis wins since it's a) freeware and b) is widely supported by players, video file wrappers, etc. AAC only has b, the rest only have a at this point.
So yeah, go Ogg Vorbis. For now anyway.
maybe some of us have music that we really love. Maybe some of us love music to the point where just listening is entertainment in itself. maybe some of us feel that when it sounds worse, it's less engaging and not as special or magical.
Feel free to think we're being anal, just as we're free to think that you just don't love music enough.
/pats 600 Gb flac/shn server gently.....
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter