CDs ? MP3s?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=58612
Printed Date: December 03 2024 at 19:52
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: CDs ? MP3s?
Posted By: digdug
Subject: CDs ? MP3s?
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 09:28
|
I am curiious to see how many people listen to the different formats. ------------- Prog On! |
Replies:
Posted By: LiquidEternity
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 09:52
|
Well, I buy them all in CDs, but aside from the car and taking them places, I rip them onto a central location in my PC. Then, I guess we're looking at 256 VBR AAC. Not quite MP3, but there's not a huge difference if we're talking basic formats.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 09:55
| Vinyl, probably. |
Posted By: Lota
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:05
|
MMMM nothing like a real CD. But as previously said nothing wrong with MP3's ------------- And In The End, The Love You Take, Is Equal To The Love You Make |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:09
| These days WMA because I listen to music on my computer all day at work and I have my entire collection ripped. I still do CDs while commuting and when I want to sit down and listen to something with my undivided attention, it's got to be CD with headphones. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:11
| These days WMA because I listen to music on my computer all day at work and I have my entire collection ripped. I still do CDs while commuting and when I want to sit down and listen to something with my undivided attention, it's got to be CD with headphones. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:13
|
Is there an echo in here? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:14
|
Is there an echo in here?
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:15
| Mostly OGG rips of CD |
Posted By: StyLaZyn
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:20
Ogg is the best compressed file type, IMO. I like to use ogg vorbis. ------------- 
|
Padraic wrote:Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 10:35
|
^ Ogg is great, but it doesn't play in most MP3 Players. Therefore, I rip my CD collection to lossless files (FLAC) and two rounds of lossy files: high quality MP3 (V0, variable bitrate at around 245 kbps) for the computer and medium quality MP3 (V5, variable bitrate at around 130 kbps) for my portable MP3 Player. I was only once tempted to buy a vinyl and I regret that decision. |
Posted By: Alberto Muņoz
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 11:30
|
Any format with the proper quality.
I collect music, not plastic -------------  |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 11:31
What? Nobody listens to reel to reel anymore? 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 11:41
I've noticed that happen to me on occasion. The post takes too long to go through so I keep clicking the post reply button.  Usually I catch it and delete the repeat to make everything neat. I wish I had a good dbx cassette deck. I'm got some rare stuff recorded off the radio I can't play back anymore. When did reel to reel fade away anyway? That used to be the bomb for audiophiles. |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 12:38
We got a place in St. Louis that sells turntable,decks and reel to reels(Record Exchange). I don't know of anyplace locally where you can still pick up reel tape though. I suppose if you got a reel to reel a search of the net would turn up someone that still sells tape. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 13:33
I read that blank VHS are about to go extinct. Time for one of favorite cartoons whenever this subject comes up: ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 13:35
|
Most often? I think I listen to MP3 almost exclusively these days. All legal of course ... About 90% is my own CD collection ripped to MP3, the others are mostly from eMusic.com, but also from Amazon MP3 (they opened in Germany about two months ago). I rarely ever listen to CD directly anymore ... but I still listen to vinyl, and DVD-Audio. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 13:38
| Music ripped from my CDs, of course. |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 13:40
|
I did a similar poll a little while back, and CD came out top on that. I listen almost exclusively to MP3 legal these days, with most of my CD collection ripped to the PC. That's why I only had 35 on the PA Top 100 thread in vinyl/CD - most of my collection now is downloaded.
------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: darkshade
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 13:48
|
yea i rarely listen to cds directly, its all mp3 ripped from cds. i think 20% of my music collection is a mix of trades, D/L (legal and unregulated), and other various sources...
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/MysticBoogy" rel="nofollow - My Last.fm 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 14:21
If you purchased the files through legal channels then of course they're part of your collection. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 14:35
You may have mentioned this in another thread, but what bitrate do you like. I do WMA and I've heard that a WMA can be done at half the bit rate of any MP3 bit rate and you get the same quality (might just be Microsoft propaganda or something). |
Posted By: limeyrob
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 15:16
|
The vast majority of my music is on CD which I convert to ATRAC3plus for my Walkman (64mps). I spend most of my time listening on my Walkman and computer through SonicStage. I also play the odd CD every now and again and listen through headphones -70% or speakers (30%). My Walkman fits my lifestyle perfectly and have none of the reported problems with SonicStage - perhaps I am not as impatient as some folk. I am yet to download any mp3 stuff as I like the physicality of CDs.
|
On rare occassions I'll play my old vinyls but I need to invest in a decent stylus - my daughter decided my old one was a nice toy. Grrr!Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 15:54
|
I agree with Slartibartfast, in that I listen to my collection of CDs as WMA files. Searching through my Zune software is much easier than searching through all my CDs, and while at school my mp3 player is what keeps me sane walking to and from classes.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 15:58
I think that WMA might still have some advantages over MP3 at really low bitrates (e.g. a 64kbit WMA will sound better than a 64kbit MP3). But at this level of compression both formats can't compete with the original signal. I use CDex to rip the CDs to MP3 ... it uses the LAME encoder, and I configure it to a variable bitrate at highest quality settings (q=0). Usually that results in average bitrates around 256kbit. I wouldn't recommend using any less with MP3 ... with WMA I think I would also use 256kbit, mainly to be on the safe. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 16:04
I like my Zune. My first player a Creative Labs one, had a hard drive failure. My Toshiba Gigabeat filled up and starting misbehaving, plus their support was terrible. It's still around for in pinch. Zune's got enough capacity that is should last me for a while. So cool to be able to carry my whole damn collection around with me.  |
Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 20:49
Agreed. Of all the varied mp3 players I've tried, iPod was annoying (as is the iTunes software IMO), several others weren't very nice feature-wise, then I found the Zune, did pretty much everything I wanted and was simple to navigate. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 21:24
Yeah when I read that the WMAs were as good as the MP3s at half the bit rate, I totally re-ripped everything to 64 WMA. I think the reloading was what did my Creative Labs player in, because in my first round I started out MP3 at a higher rate. I think it was 256. Then redid everything at 128 MP3 then again at 64 WMA. I've been happy with the 64 bit WMA. Plus I'd rather blow my brains out than re-rip everything to a higher rate and run into that whole space problem thing on my Zune. Still when that wears out and the technology improves, you never know. I still have the CDs for best quality listening and I can't see departing with the "hard" copies. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Calculate900
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 21:42
| A combination of CD and MP3, though I'm starting to listen to more vinyl now too. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 08 2009 at 21:51
I rip everything to 64kbit WMA. I do it out of habit, since I've been ripping CDs ever since I only had a 4 GB desktop way back when. While its obviously not at CD quality, I don't get any knee-jerk reactions about the less-than-perfect-sound. Plus, it helps me save space. I already have 40 GB of music that I've ripped from my CDs... imagine re-ripping all of it at a higher bit rate? That'd be interminable torture. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 01:22
|
^ " imagine re-ripping all of it at a higher bit rate? That'd be interminable torture" This is why I am ripping them in a high bitrate - I would hate to have to do it all over again. At 256kbit you can't distinguish them from the original (this has been proven by many independent tests - I don't believe anyone who says they can hear a difference), so this is the optimum middle ground between file size and quality for me. So ... do yourself a favor and never ever buy decent speakers ... you would be in for interminable torture, both when listening to the music and having to rip the CDs again.  ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 01:27
|
I prefer CD's, but nearly always end up listening to MP3's. ------------- 
|
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 01:43
I work with these  A billion times better than the laptop's built-in things. If I ever decide to get some high-quality system instead, well, I'll just play my CDs. Heck knows I'm NOT going to rip 1,200 compact discs again. |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 02:30
|
^ Altec Lansing? It's surely not a bad brand, but switching to a 2.1 system could be a huge improvement at little cost. My personal recommendation: http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Speaker-System-Subwoofer-Black/dp/B000AM6QHE/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1244532556&sr=8-5">  ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Q6
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 02:48
mmmm, granted its hard to tell when you skip between tracks but run 2 side by side and switch A/B and you'll notice the difference. Independent experts? 256kbps that's the sample rate conversion provided by Amazon and many of the big music sites. I provide my tunes at 320kbps and you can notice the difference but it is subtle and again it really need to be done at A/B switching level on a good system. There's a better overall "soundstage". The reason the big companies compress to 256 is because it is a compromise between quality / bandwidth and download size (their costs), otherwise they would provide higher bitrate samples. But "most" listeners on most sound systems wouldn't hear the difference. If you are one of those that can't hear the difference then there's no problem. Unfortunately some people can hear the difference. Analogue recording was infinity-bit and digital recording is by virtue of the process harsh. Noise in the form of "dither" is even added during the recording process to hide the underlying digital distortion that occurs on the way to "red book CD standard" but you can only hear this on really quiet passages of music. (well I've only heard it in quiet passages) Listeners are being persuaded that 256 is the norm... but when your recording at sample rates of 44,100 to 96,000 the relative "BIt Rates" (i.e. how much data per second is used to carry the signal) you can hear the difference. The relative proportions are 0.256 Mbit/sec (MP3) compared to 1.35 Mbit/sec (CD) some 5 times more information. That musical information is there for a reason. It benefits the recording and the listeners pleasure. It's not there for the benefit of the CD player. Sorry to be nerdy :) That said I generally rip my CDs to my iPod therefore MP3s or my Nokia phone which allows .wavs. Q ------------- http://www.paulcusick.co.uk - www.paulcusick.co.uk |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 02:56
|
Vinyl, CD and MP3 (legal or not) equally. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 04:36
http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html - http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html It's not just me ... if you think you can hear a difference then I won't argue about that ... *personally* I think you're imagining it, but of course I'm not you, so I can't know.
Analog recording is far from being "infinite" ... especially when the result is pressed onto a piece of plastic with a metal stamp. Vinyl particles (clusters of molecules) are introducing effects very much like digital quantisation.
I rip the files to a VBR format. This means that the encoder at all times is free to choose the appropriate bitrate from a range between 64kbit and 320kbit. This is also what Amazon MP3 uses (except for some albums which are in 256kbit constant bit rate). BTW: The musical information that is ommitted in the MP3 file is not audible to most people. There are some conditions that break this mechanism, like for example when you're suffering from a loss of hearing on one side. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: b_olariu
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 05:10
| CD for sure. I don't like to ripp my CD collection into mp3. If I want something to listen , go with CD as he is, if I want mp3 then this way , if I have a casste or vinyl same, never ripping in mp3 anything as long I have them already in other format. No really matters wich format as long it sounds good and without any problems., but I'm a fun of CD because when I'm listning to the music inside I like to hold that CD in my hands and read all the information it contains.But of course I have mp3 like any of you from here, but that mp3 are only mp3 and not in other format. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 06:05
Well, I'm pretty much doomed at this point. But you're absolutely right. I've hooked my player up to my main stereo system and it didn't sound pretty, particularly as you crank up the volume. But plugging in my best headphones doesn't have the same effect. Car stereo, OK. Computer speakers, OK. CD's sound great no matter what I play them on. I tried sticking an LP in my car CD player, oh never mind.  I'm probably losing my mind along with my hearing or something.  ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 06:55
|
^ then again you don't have to re-rip your collection in one go. You could simply re-rip CDs as you're listening to them.
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: crimson87
Date Posted: June 09 2009 at 19:56
|
Legal downloads and CDS , I mean there is nothing like paying for a file.
|
Posted By: moreitsythanyou
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 00:10
|
I rip my CDs to my computer plus downloads (some legal) CDs are in my car though -------------  <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR] |
Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 01:20
|
Mostly CD's. I seldom listen to music on my PC. I have some legal downloads (MP3) and I still have a small collection of LP's, but CD's are still the best for me.
I was a bit disappointed by the sound quality of some (legal) downloads. I'm not a sound freak and I never was, but I could tell the difference between CD's and MP3's quite well. Still, it depends. Lately I downloaded a remaster of Steve Hackett's Defector and I was surprised at the good sound quality.
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 01:44
|
^ Did you ever consider the possibility that when you can hear a difference between CD and MP3 it might be simply because the MP3 was ripped from a different source? For example, maybe you have a remastered CD but the MP3 you found on the internet (legal or illegal, doesn't matter for this consideration) was ripped from a different version of the album, or even from an analog copy through tape or vinyl? I'm very sure that if you rip a CD to MP3 yourself, with a proper, modern codec and at least 256kbit, you can't hear the difference. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 01:48
It really depends on how you want to see it. To me it's not the file I'm paying for, it's the music. For CDs you could also say that you're paying for a piece of plastic. Ok, you get the booklet too in most cases - but that contains information that you also find on the internet - on the band's website, at wikipedia etc.. I know that having the booklet is one of the reasons why people still prefer CDs, but to me the music is still the most important thing about an album. Artwork is important too, but when you buy an album as a download today you get the artwork too, so it's not really an issue anymore. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 08:07
With these speakers Walter will already feel the difference between high and low bitrate files. Listening to his collection will not be as pleasurable any more |
Posted By: St.Cleve Chronicle
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 11:29
| I mostly listen to CD's, but there's something magical about vinyl. So, I voted for that. |
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 11:41
|
I saw this article in a hi-fi magazine once, where they had a variety of professionals testing different formats and set-ups. They were blindfolded, so they did not know which was which, and in the end, vinyl was the clear winner. I reckon it's because it does sound most like audio should, after all, it's completely analog, isn't it :D anyway, I love hunting for old vinyls and then listening to them scratch on my player. Though nowadays old discs cost more than cds, easily. I can't find a copy of In The Court of the Crimson King for less then 30€ here. And they're all used of course. |
Posted By: Q6
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 13:00
mmm I was trying to add a little fact and personal knowledge/experience to your question. Unfortunately when the discussion starts talking about not believing people it stops being an informed discussion (no matter how many winks you add) . Then when analogue...infinity bit.... is converted to vinyl groove... and molecules blah blah..., your science information is entertaining, but belongs in a hitchiker's guide to the galaxy novel. We can all do that ... either a molecule is there or it isn't ! So everything is binary / digital! Therefore analogue is a figment of our imaginations !! And I only have 2 ears so I must my 7.1 surround sound is only in stereo. Philosphy grade 1 science It's quirky and humerous but of little real fact. Bored now. ------------- http://www.paulcusick.co.uk - www.paulcusick.co.uk |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 13:34
|
^ My problem is that I'm a skilled and experienced musician ... and I've come to trust my ears. I don't hear a difference, you say you hear one. Between my own first hand experience and your claim, I choose my experience, especially since it is backed by the study I linked to above and many other comments that I've read - and heard - over the years. I've never ever met anybody who could prove that claim (that they could hear a difference between CD and high quality MP3), but there are plenty of independent studies that showed that people were not able to make the distinction. And the whole vinyl thing has been discussed to death too ... the format is inherently inferior to CD. I love vinyls, I collect them and enjoy listening to them. There may even be some albums that I prefer to listen to on vinyl than on CD or MP3 ... but I'm sure that this has nothing to do with them being superior ... the mix could simply be different (vinyl is usually mastered differently than linear mediums). ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 16:09
Well, since the Hackett album that I mentioned I did considered that a sound quality equal to CD is possible, but I hadn't really thought of the quality loss through the process of MP3-ification. I just thought that the Hackett album was a sort of new generation MP3. You're the expert on this.
It is good news for the future, because I do believe that MP3 in the end is a better format, because of it being so compact.
For the moment, though, it doesn't change a lot: at the moment I trust buying CD's more than I trust buying MP3 downloads. But the Hackett album that I mentioned did open my eyes (or ears in this case) that a very good sound quality is possible with MP3, and that in the future I will probably switch from CD to MP3 in all music.
Thanks for the information. BTW a bit off topic: I'm very happy with the Secunia software you suggested in another thread. It works very well.
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: June 10 2009 at 16:47
|
^ You can still give emusic a try ... even if you only start with a download plan of 10-20 tracks per month, you can save quite some money. Over the years I downloaded 412 albums there, and I never ever encountered a badly ripped file. Rather the reverse ... some of their files are well beyond 256kbps on average. The new Peter Hammill album that I downloaded a few hours ago only has about 210kbps ... that's because there's not so much going on in the music frequency-wise (it's piano and vocals much of the time). Sounded amazing ... at least to my ears. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: June 11 2009 at 04:07
Thanks for the advice. I did download some free tracks from E-Music from Anthony Phillips, but still I thought the sound quality was a bit poor. Maybe it has to do with the process on my pc, burning it on the cd. I'm not an expert on this. Maybe the problem lies with me, not with E-Music or any of the other providers.
E-Music mostly didn't have the albums that I wanted to have, but that may change in the future.
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: June 11 2009 at 04:22
|
I prefer Mp3 to CD's now, in fact my CD's are beginning to gather dust and I would still put vinyl before CD as a preference
Vinyl - all encompassing....wonderful
CD's - Too frigging small to read the covers. They always were and the plastic covers often snapped at the hinge
Mp3's - Make for fantastic digital library archives, of course the Cd and Vinyl contribute to the archives as wellas legal downloads but it is more exciting than CD IMO  ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |