re-ripping my CD collection - one question!

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by gui3, Apr 16, 2008.

  1. gui3

    gui3 all the dude ever wanted was his rug back

    Joined:
    May 6, 2000
    Messages:
    9,498
    Likes Received:
    2
    i was using apple lossless because it's good to know it's *lossless* and will be backed up and outlive my CD's.

    the only problem is, it's also *unsupported* by devices like the PS3, XBOX, and windows media player. i don't want to be tied to apple players.

    also, i don't claim to be a super-audiophile. i just want to encode them in something modern, archival quality (even if i can't hear the difference!) with wide-ranging compatibility.

    so what do you think: 320k AAC, 320K MP3, or WAV?


    right now i'm looking at the 320k AAC *if* it's a good enough codec. whatchu think?
     
  2. Sexual Vanilla

    Sexual Vanilla New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina
    You can't say you honestly can tell a difference between a lossy format and lossless format. You're simply wasting your hard drive space.
     
  3. DaveyD

    DaveyD Fuck Ohio State, son

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Messages:
    18,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Somewhere in Minnesota
  4. gui3

    gui3 all the dude ever wanted was his rug back

    Joined:
    May 6, 2000
    Messages:
    9,498
    Likes Received:
    2
    i specifically said that wasn't the point.


    also, why VBR?
     
  5. Fifafever

    Fifafever OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Messages:
    5,603
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    San Diego, Canada
    No discernible difference in quality between V0 and 320 and V0 takes up much less space.
     
  6. R-Type

    R-Type The Bydo Empire must die!

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    CT
    If you want a platform agnostic lossless format, try flac or wavpack. You can be fairly sure the formats will be supported on future pc players/converters you end up using because both formats are open. While most commercial players don't support these formats, many homebrew 'set top' software such as xbox media center do.

    The advantage to storing in lossless as opposed to high bitrate lossy is maintaining maximum possible quality when transcoding media to fit the specific formats and storage capacities of devices you own now..and in the future. Compared with a lossless -> lossy encode, lossy -> lossy introduces noticeable artifacts in the sound, even when the bitrate is high. Of course, how much of this you perceive depends on your ears, your equipment, your listening environments, the source and target lossy codecs used, and how picky you are.

    Ripping in lossless also ensures that you'll never have to rerip your whole collection again should your tastes or needs change in the future...even if you want to change from one lossless format to another.
     
  7. dorkultra

    dorkultra OT's resident crohns dude OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    22,735
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    yinzer / nilbog, trollhio
    i just make it 192kbps vbr mp3, sounds fine to me
     
  8. Doc Brown

    Doc Brown Don't make me make you my hobby

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    16,404
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    The situation you're in is exactly why you don't want to rip to small lossy files.

    When you go to convert a small lossy file to another format, you wind up with crap.
     
  9. Ex Inferis

    Ex Inferis Shut the fuck up OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Messages:
    54,431
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Fappville
  10. dissonance

    dissonance reset OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    5,652
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    KS
    If space isn't an issue you could keep them all as WAV's in one directory and your normal sized MP3's in another. That way you have your lossless files preserved while being able to listen to smaller files.
     
  11. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't be silly, cotton-ears. I can definitely hear the difference between mp3 128kbps and mp3 320kbps, so I can sure as hell hear the difference between mp3 128kbps and flac.

    That said, I use mp3 192kbps because I'm not planning to get rid of my CDs, and 192kbps is high-enough quality that it sounds clear over a car stereo on the highway.
     
  12. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    i already use itunes so I use apple lossless.
     
  13. mymail5082

    mymail5082 Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Messages:
    30,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Baton Rouge
    i think he was referring to the high bitrate lossy formats such as a 320 mp3 which were referred to in the original post versus lossless, but i could be wrong.
     
  14. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    some songs make it very easy to tell the diff. Especially in the highs, such as lots of drum cymbals.
     
  15. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep. Treble is inherently higher-resolution on account of the shorter wavelengths, which means treble is the first thing to go when you start degrading.

    I've been happy with my LAME-encoded 192kb/s mp3s, though.
     

Share This Page