ipod v. ZEN

^ it depends on the music too. There are complex audio signals which are hard to compress, and simple signals which are easy to compress. Basically the more is going on in the music the more difficult it is to reduce the information without any audible change.

Here are some albums which are very difficult to compress ... try any of them (Lossless/CD vs. 160kbps mp3) and you'll most definitely hear a difference. I picked those because I rip the CDs using variable bitrates, which means that the encoder chooses higher bitrates for complex signals and lower bitrates for simpler signals, and those albums were the ones with the highest resulting bitrates.

Anata - Under a Stone with No Inscription
Into Eternity - The Scattering of Ashes
Disillusion - Back to Times of Splendor
Devin Townsend - Synchestra
Converge - You Fail Me






Edited by MikeEnRegalia - March 21 2007 at 02:40

^ no. The complexity of a signal is essentially determined by how many frequencies are active simultaneously ... the least complex signal is silence (obviously), the second least complex signal is one perfect sine wave (one frequency). All other signals can be thought as a combination of different sine waves layered on top of each other.  The more independent waves there are, the more difficult it is to remove information without affecting the quality. mp3 uses some tricks - some parts of the signal cannot be heard anyway for various reasons and can be left out without any problems. But when the desired bitrate is too low, the algorithm also removes parts which are audible ... particularly in high frequency sounds. Cymbals are a good benchmark.

MikeEnRegalia wrote: ^ it depends on the music too. There are complex audio signals which are hard to compress, and simple signals which are easy to compress. Basically the more is going on in the music the more difficult it is to reduce the information without any audible change. Here are some albums which are very difficult to compress ... try any of them (Lossless/CD vs. 160kbps mp3) and you'll most definitely hear a difference. I picked those because I rip the CDs using variable bitrates, which means that the encoder chooses higher bitrates for complex signals and lower bitrates for simpler signals, and those albums were the ones with the highest resulting bitrates. Anata - Under a Stone with No Inscription Into Eternity - The Scattering of Ashes Disillusion - Back to Times of Splendor Devin Townsend - Synchestra Converge - You Fail Me

I would also add The Human Equation, sounds terrible but acceptable.

Creative have too long a history of making crap soundcards for me to give them a chance (Ok, that's probably more my failing than theirs these days..!) and iPods are just overpriced for what they do. I've not seen anything to rival Cowon, although iRiver and Archos aren't bad. And Neuros, if you don't mind something a bit bulky.

All that said, I might end up working for a subsidiary of Creative next year so


Re bitrates/lossless compression, another interesting point is that noisier recordings are much harder to compress - that's not surprising from a technical point of view because of Fourier Transform and all that malarky, but it's counterintuitive because many people expect to be able to use low bitrates on poor quality originals, wheras it's actually probably likely to make more of a difference than on a quality modern recording...

The simplest wave form are the most pleasing to the ear aren't they? OF course here at PA we are concerned with what's pleasing to the mind as well. 

Edited by Deathrabbit - March 22 2007 at 17:21

is 320kbps CD quality?

How do you go about creating a lossless file?

Do be warned though, a 20 minute song in lossless quality is roughly 125 - 140 MB in size

MY Creative Zen Jukebox wont play WMA Lossless....

Everything I have works with everything I have. Apple, Apple, Apple.....