My MP3 player broke!

Bob Greece wrote: I paid 30 Euros for my speakers and 40 Euros for the CD player. So the whole system cost 70 Euros. That means that Mike's system should be 10x better and Oliver's 100x better.

 And I'm sure that there's also a system for 80.000 EUR, and the owner is convinced that it is much superior even than Oliver's system.

I paid 30 Euros for my speakers and 40 Euros for the CD player. So the whole system cost 70 Euros. That means that Mike's system should be 10x better and Oliver's 100x better.

My Harman Kardon system (amp, cd) with Elac speakers cost me not more than 800 EUR ... and I doubt that your system sounds x10 better.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ I'm so glad that the aera of tapes is over ... limited frequency range, dropouts, tape decks running slightly too slow or too fast, tapes getting damaged by magnetic fields, moisture, dust, heat (sun) etc. etc.

... chewed up tapes, tape stretch, tapes so tight that the reels don't turn ....

... but one great thing about tapes is that I have tapes from the eighties and you can still buy tape players cheap in the shops. I have LPs from the eighties but I can't find anywhere to buy a cheap record player. Also, you can't play LPs on the move like you can with tapes.

I have a book about American cars from the 60's and I was amazed to read that some of them had LP players inside.

I was talking to a friend of mine who is a hi-fi enthusiast. The bottom line is money. For the amount of money that most of us have to spend, surely a CD player is going to sound better than a tape player. Particularly on the 30 Euro speakers I have.

OliverStoned - I would like to ask you how much money you spend on all your equipment but it's a personal question and of course there's no need to answer. 

^ hideous pictures of legacy equipment won#t change my opinion. ;-)

 

^ I'm so glad that the aera of tapes is over ... limited frequency range, dropouts, tape decks running slightly too slow or too fast, tapes getting damaged by magnetic fields, moisture, dust, heat (sun) etc. etc.

Tape sounds awful compared to CD.

Bob Greece wrote: Lindsay Lohan wrote: DONT YOU HEAR THE TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY BETWEEN MP3 AND CD'S I never noticed the difference. Maybe I should get my ears checked?

 

I have a friend who reckons he hear a clear difference in favour of CDs, much better than me (does't that remind you of the noise created arguing what was better CDs or vinyl). MP3 work fine in non-perfect conditions - e.g. the car player (hey with the amount of background noise, even cassettes sound good in most cars) , walking the dog and the Walkman etc.

goose wrote: I think there are only a handful programs available for PC (EAC, Plextools and one or two others) that make bit perfect copies. No software that comes with CD writers will do this, unless you buy a Plextor (and I wouldn't advise it, because they're much more expensive than others that are just as good).

CDex and the WMP 9+ do that without any problems, provided that they're configured properly.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Now that's objectively wrong. mp3 does many things, but it doesn't change the tuning ... not in the slightest.

Well... it doesn't change any frequencies, but it could possibly alter the perceived pitch because of some frequencies being removed as well as other artifacts. It's worth remembering that pitch can be affected by things other than frequency.

oliverstoned wrote: I've made the test, and that's why i gave more than 100 computer burned records to a non-audiophile friend...

Then I'm afraid there's a problem with your CD player or your computer - probably over 99 in 100 computers aren't correctly set up to make perfect copies of CDs. I think there are only a handful programs available for PC (EAC, Plextools and one or two others) that make bit perfect copies. No software that comes with CD writers will do this, unless you buy a Plextor (and I wouldn't advise it, because they're much more expensive than others that are just as good).