Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

For you nutjobs who insist on Apple Lossless, yes you Ron! =p


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
67 replies to this topic

#1 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted May 14 2009 - 07:49 AM

Gizmodo - The Great MP3 Bitrate Test: My Ears Versus Yours - Bitrate test

Take the test!

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#2 of 68 OFFLINE   Ted Todorov

Ted Todorov

    Screenwriter



  • 2,895 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 2000

Posted May 15 2009 - 05:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Posten
Before calling us nutjobs you should go after all the people going nuts over Blu-ray's "HD" audio formats, DVD-A, SACD, vinyl rigs costing tens of thousands, cables costing 100s, etc, etc. There is every reason to keep your CD collection in Apple Lossless and none in MP3. A 1TB disk these day is under $100. I doubt anyone here has a CD collection so big that it won't fit on a 1TB disk in Apple Lossless. Why deliberately reduce your music quality? Should we be aiming for the lowest common denominator?

Also, back in the day I did a blind test of 256K MP3 vs 256K AAC -- I picked which was which every single time -- MP3 was turning the bottom end to mud. I think that listening to the original CD quality can't any worse than AAC Posted Image

Look, I know you're kidding when you say nutjob, but CD quality is hardly excessive. Spending zillions on cables on the other hand...
Hold on tightly, let go lightly.

 


#3 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted May 15 2009 - 05:47 AM

I'm not a lossless multichannel fanatic either. And yes I'm (half) kidding when I call you guys nutjobs. I just think that the desire for this stuff has to be tempered with the lessons learned in from the rise of MP3 vice the disasters that occurred during the so called format wars.

As Marco says, believe it or not but the vast majority of people don't care about quality. And quality is an education issue not an experience issue.

Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD: Nobody cares

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#4 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 22 2011 - 04:10 AM

This will be awesome, all you guys who insisted on Lossless will have to re-encode everything =)

http://www.cnn.com/2.../24.bit.music/#


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#5 of 68 OFFLINE   Shane D

Shane D

    Supporting Actor



  • 651 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 2001

Posted February 22 2011 - 05:57 AM

why would we have to re-encode? cds are still 16 bit, that article just talkes about getting downloads to be higher than cd's



i do wish apple and amazon would put out lossless file formats. I'd pay a little premium to get a better file above a normal mp3.

one of the reasons i like what trent reznor does. he gives you like 5 options on downloads



#6 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 22 2011 - 06:34 AM

OK, repurchase then.  Which is arguably worse.


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#7 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 22 2011 - 09:15 AM

Ars throws cold water on it:

http://arstechnica.c...-why-bother.ars


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#8 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted February 23 2011 - 06:42 AM

Giz says its for suckers.

http://gizmodo.com/#!5768446


I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#9 of 68 OFFLINE   Shane D

Shane D

    Supporting Actor



  • 651 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 2001

Posted February 24 2011 - 02:41 AM

i agree 24 bit may be overkill for home set ups. but i would love for apple to start selling apple lossless files and for itunes to support flac and amazon start selling flacs. if i have a choice between mp3 or physical, i go physical. I got 3 cd's just this week because i want the most information i can get and each disk did cost me about 4 bucks more apiece than the download price.


i will buy digital files when i have to. one of the cds i got had a special edition thats no longer avaiable for physical purchase, but amazon and itunes both had the 13th track, apple was album only, but amazon was more than happy to sell me just the 13th track alone. i'd rather had the cd on it, but in this case it at least allowed me to get the music. this happpend to me before on the tron soundtrack too. UK got the 2nd disk of 5 tracks and then apple got 2 exclusives and amazone got 1 i think. Here again i was forced to get mp3s which i was kinda put out about, but had lossless versions been available i'd of felt fine about buying them.



#10 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted October 27 2011 - 02:03 PM

A present from Apple: http://alac.macosforge.org/

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#11 of 68 OFFLINE   TonyD

TonyD

    Executive Producer



  • 16,198 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1999
  • Real Name:Tony D.
  • LocationDisney World and Universal Florida

Posted October 27 2011 - 03:14 PM

What is it?
facebook.com/whotony

#12 of 68 OFFLINE   Ted Todorov

Ted Todorov

    Screenwriter



  • 2,895 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 17 2000

Posted October 28 2011 - 02:18 AM

Apple Lossless allows you to compress a CD without losing any quality -- you could then decompress it and produce a bit for bit equivalent copy of the original CD.  Apple Lossless saves about 50% on the space used in the original, uncompressed CD.


So the question is, why did Apple just open source it -- my guess:


To support third party hardware Air Play devices which must be able to reproduce ALAC.


My hope: to start selling audio in Apple Lossless via iTunes.  Not holding my breath.


Hold on tightly, let go lightly.

 


#13 of 68 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,248 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted October 30 2011 - 11:34 PM

Sam, are you yelling "fire" again?  :)

Sound is subjective.  You can poll a vast number of people

on how they evaluate music at different bitrates and there won't

be a unanimous consensus.


I can hear the difference between lossless recording and
something downloaded as an MP3.  I have been saying this

for years.


 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#14 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted October 31 2011 - 01:43 AM

Ron, did you take the test above? I don't doubt that people can hear subtle differences in each version, far from it. My point all along is that the tradeoffs to get there have not, overall, been worth it. That continues to be true today, but Apple making their lossless algorithm not just open source but completely free is a big step towards industry wide adoption. This makes it even as interesting than MP3 which itself has some known patent and licensing issues. The question that remains is" Are the processing overhead and storage requirements (and bandwidth needed to move those bigger files) still impediment against wide adoption", and I suspect that the answer to that remains yes.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#15 of 68 OFFLINE   Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul



  • 40,248 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted October 31 2011 - 05:26 AM

Sam,


No, I did not take the test.  I am traveling for the next few days.


...but I don't need to take the test.  I have been dealing with
downloadable music and CD lossless for years as I am constantly

adding new music to my iPod collection.


I can hear the difference in sound between lower and higher bitrates.

I have talked about that many times.  In general, a low-bitrate MP3

is going to produce some very undesirable results in its highs.  This

is why I generally don't include any MP3 on my iPod under 320-360 kbps.





 

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

 Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders  Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

 Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive Click Here for our complete DVD review archive

 Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule  Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#16 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted October 31 2011 - 05:33 AM

Gotcha.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#17 of 68 OFFLINE   Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor



  • 9,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted November 02 2011 - 02:04 PM

I plan on eventually re-ripping my CDs to lossless. The reasoning for me is simple: I'm pretty much married to the Apple solution for my portable music, and Apple doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon (this was a real concern just a decade ago). I ripped my entire library at 320AAC and now that I'm over 130GB and climbing, I realize that to have my entire library portable I'll probably have to re-rip at 256AAC or lower. The 160GB looks to be the last iPod Classic Apple will make, so I will have to wait for the Touches to get to that level which may be several generations away (if ever, because they'll try to push the cloud solution I'm sure in order to reduce/eliminate their dependence on Samsung creating higher density memory chips). Also Apple has made, from time to time, improvements in conversion to AAC. Rather than having to eventually rip all of my CDs to AAC again, I'll rip them once to ALAC, and then whenever a newer conversion process, or a new CODEC comes out, I'll be able to re-rip my entire library from a hard drive filled with ALAC and do it as an overnight (or likely several nights) batch job without having to load over 1000 CDs into a tray. I know, I know, people will say I should use EAC to FLAC for the master files and rip from those. But that kind of requires more technical know-how than I'm willing to invest right now (EAC has like a ton of settings). Ripping to ALAC is a one button task in iTunes, as is creating AAC from ALAC. If someone has an easy CD to EAC/FLAC workflow (and ideally an easy FLAC to AAC workflow) I'd love to hear/see it. I'm not planning on a re-rip of my catalog to lossless for at least a year or so. I had hoped to do it on a new Mac Pro but it looks like that line may die...

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#18 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted November 03 2011 - 01:29 AM

See, I don't understand any of these arguments. One button and it re-encodes at 128 for you automatically: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2436628?start=0&tstart=0 And I used to have the mentality of whole or nothing archive on the portable but it simply isn't practical. Take 3 minutes, make a playlist of the artists you HAVE TO have, make a few smart playlists and you are done. Depriving yourself of any portable music since you can't have it all is the height of sour grapes to me. And within 2 weeks for most of you this will be moot with icloud and Music Match anyway, you will have a free copy of all your music wherever you have network services. Stop being so lazy and embrace the future ;)

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt


#19 of 68 OFFLINE   Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor



  • 9,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted November 03 2011 - 04:36 AM

Sam - in my own single blind tests done years ago (so the results are probably invalid because my hearing has undoubtedly worsened) I ripped a bunch of tracks at WAV, ALAC, 320/256/192/128 AAC. Had a friend randomly play them to me while I listened on a pretty good set of headphone (Beyerdynamic DT880). I identified the 128AAC the majority of the time (something like 4 out of 5 times). I had much more trouble at the 192 and higher rates. Because at the time my iPod greatly exceeded what my library size would be at 320AAC, I decided to burn at that rate. I am willing to go down to 256 without hesitation, even perhaps 192 if space concerns become constrained (i.e. Apple never releases a flash memory iPod over 100GB) but I simply can't go to 128. I'll buy like 5 iPod Classics when they are discontinued before I do that! :D I could envision paying $25 a year for iTunes Music Match (of my nearly 12000 songs, less than 20 were purchased/free through iTunes, all are rips of CDs I own). My main concern is that I listen to quite a few indie bands that will likely not be on there, so it will be a question of how Match works in tandem with your collection and being able to easily ID those tracks that weren't matched. For example, ideally iTunes would tell me "here are the 1500 songs we couldn't match" and give me a way to easily sync to my iPhone the 1500 songs directly from my library, and the remaining songs from the cloud. My only worry is how it would perform over 3G. Even at 256kbps you're talking about 6MB per 4 minute song. While work and home are covered by wi-fi, I do a significant amount of listening on my walk to/from work every day (about an hour round trip). There's a lot of unknowns for me with Match. It could work really well. Or...

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#20 of 68 OFFLINE   Sam Posten

Sam Posten

    Executive Producer



  • 16,847 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1997
  • Real Name:Sam Posten
  • LocationAberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ

Posted November 03 2011 - 06:00 AM

Or you could stop thinking about having everything and embrace the smart playlist, its really that simple. Sort by publisher, pick out all the publishers who don't have a massive presence, done.

I lost my signature and all I got was this Nutter t-shirt