"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote in news:gbavoc$o88$1@aioe.org: > I'm not sure "perfect playback" is the issue- I was just taking issue > with your claim that anyone couldn't tell the difference between a 32k > MP3 and a 320k played on an iPhone. The difference is very real, even > with cheap headphones. > > I have another test you need to take. The worst piece of equipment in any sound system is YOU. Don't think so? Drop by a real audiologist and get a full sweep hearing test, even at your age. After you look at that response graph, any system graph becomes a moot point! Humans, today, are nearly deaf 5 years after birth at many frequency bands caused by our environment. Just like iPhone, perception is caused a lot by the hype. I call them "audiofools" and have made a fairly comfortable living playing along with them.... archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 08:50:45 -0600, "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote: >Personally I use Windows Media format rather than MP3 because, like the >iPhone/iPod's native AAC format it gives better quality in a smaller file >format. You trade a little compatibility for half the storage space, but it >gives relatively decent playback on a portable even at 64k, at least to my >four decade-old ears. This may be moving far from the main topic, but since you're expressing opinions about this, my ears are older than yours, and yet I'm extremely sensitive to the differences. It may have to do with the way I've been listening to music for many years, or just a matter of differing physical sensitivities (taste buds vary greatly in sensitivity, so why not this). As a result, I'm using Apple Lossless format which is similar to FLAC, although I've heard it compresses more efficiently. I'm not much into the physics of it, but I figured I'd aim for the least possible degradation of sound out of the gate, as the iPhone's amplifier and particularly its headphone output leave a lot to be desired. I didn't realize what a difference this would make in file size, as I've never owned any sort of MP3 player (listening to typical MP3's was very unpleasant for me, and so I'd always ignored iPods). And once I started ripping the music I didn't feel like doing extensive comparison testing. I can only get some 45 albums or so on my 16 gig. iPhone as a result. For some that would be torture, and I understand the impulse to want to have your entire collection at your fingertips, but I couldn't imagine listening to low bitrate files. I just don't get that many opportunities to listen to music during the day to sacrifice the quality of the experience. In your opinion, is ripping lossless worthwhile? I don't think I'll change my practices, but I'd be curious to hear someone else's take. BTW, my headphones for the iPhone are Etymotic HF2's - I've been listening to ER4-S's with a powerful headphone amp for years, and these have a similar audio profile. Thanks, DGI archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

David G. Imber <imber@maniform.com> wrote in news:n6hjd49d8qngivthm0pqdfj9ajrmq3fbca@4ax.com: > In your opinion, is ripping lossless worthwhile? I don't think > I'll change my practices, but I'd be curious to hear someone else's > take. BTW, my headphones for the iPhone are Etymotic HF2's - I've been > listening to ER4-S's with a powerful headphone amp for years, and > these have a similar audio profile. > > What would be better, listening to 400 MP3 files at 64Kbps, or even the pretty-much-standard 128Kbps rate on your iphone.....or the same 15 songs over and over completely lossless and perfect? I get bored with the 400, myself, and have to change them a lot if I listen through the tablet or ROKR Z6m. I suppose that's the reason why my fav player is STILL my DMC Xclef 500 with the 120GB hard drive. I CAN take all my favorite tracks with me on that. It's big and clunky and totally reliable and plays 22 hours solid on a charge and recharges in 90 minutes and plays any MP3 file copied to it with the simplest of file handlers, even the DOS copy command and has no DRM or other nanny crap and I can copy anything on and off its hard drive by simply plugging it into any USB port on any computer at all without being told NO..... 120 GB is still a fairly large collection of 128Kbps MP3 files off Usenet....(c; The powerful feel of its Toshiba 100G 2.5" hard drive's tiny vibration and that whirring sound if you hold it right up to your ear is nice, too. If you leave it in shuffle mode, go on a 6 week cruise, you'll never hear the same song twice! archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

Larry <noone@home.com> wrote: > Encode it into FLAC direct from the CD. The N800 plays FLAC. It is > smaller than the original music, but is still pretty big. If perfect > playback is the issue, FLAC is the solution. In the Apple world, there's an encoder called "Apple Lossless". Pretty much the same... -- In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates? archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

spamfalle2@arcor.de (Marc Stibane) wrote in news:1ins22f.n6a9sh1j4trraN@marc.my-fqdn.de: > In the Apple world, there's an encoder called "Apple Lossless". Pretty > much the same... > Not quite. It doesn't have alt.binaries.sounds.Apple-lossless.music newsgroups like FLAC does. I'm showing four alt.binaries.sounds.flac groups on Usenetserver, now. For the little increase in sound, FLAC (and I assume "apple lossless") makes files that are just too big to be of use IN A MOBILE DEVICE. archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

spamfalle2@arcor.de (Marc Stibane) wrote in news:1ins22f.n6a9sh1j4trraN@marc.my-fqdn.de: > In the Apple world, there's an encoder called "Apple Lossless". Pretty > much the same... > Oops....the many newsgroups alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.(genre) are all loaded with lots of FLAC files. What file extension does Apple use for those apple lossless files? I don't think I've ever seen one for download anywhere. I made the mistake of opening alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.rock and there was the Abba Best Of album with all their hits in FLAC. I must admit it does sound simply fantastic, as good as the Pioneer VideoDisc 14" platter I bought it on the first time I owned it. I miss seeing the little blonde in those tiny hot pants, though....(snif). ...er, ah....back from Fantasyland.....on the 15" floor monsters my desktop beast plays through FLAC is a great idea. But, these songs are about 27 to 30 MB EACH! You wouldn't get many songs on a tiny memory player like iPhone before you were out of memory. At 128Kbps (instead of the 593Kbps Winamp reports these FLAC files are playing at, now), it's a much better storage compromise at 3-4 MB per song in MP3. FLAC codec is loaded into my little N800 Linux tablet. I think I'll load it onto one of the memory cards, just for the hell of it, to see how it sounds through the tablet's FLAC players. 593Kbps will sure give the CPU something to think about processing over 1/2 MB/sec just for audio...(c; The heavy load of a lossless codec like FLAC, or apple lossless, hasn't been discussed, yet. Low speed MP3 won't suck up the whole machine, just to play a song. FLAC certainly will! archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:54:18 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote: >David G. Imber <imber@maniform.com> wrote in >news:n6hjd49d8qngivthm0pqdfj9ajrmq3fbca@4ax.com: > >> In your opinion, is ripping lossless worthwhile? I don't think >> I'll change my practices, but I'd be curious to hear someone else's >> take. BTW, my headphones for the iPhone are Etymotic HF2's - I've been >> listening to ER4-S's with a powerful headphone amp for years, and >> these have a similar audio profile. >> >> > >What would be better, listening to 400 MP3 files at 64Kbps, or even the >pretty-much-standard 128Kbps rate on your iphone.....or the same 15 songs >over and over completely lossless and perfect? Well, it's not 15 songs, it's about 45 albums. But to answer the question of preference, I have to say again that I don't think I'll ever change my practice, unless convinced that I absolutely won't know the difference. I mean, there are a number of ways to analogize... Would you rather eat one really delicious sandwich or fifteen made out of old kitchen sponges? That's too easy. How about one really delicious sandwich made with fresh, delicious, varied, top-quality ingredients or three sandwiches made of just bread and a single piece of lettuce. My answer's the same. DGI archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:01:04 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote: > >For the little increase in sound, FLAC (and I assume "apple lossless") >makes files that are just too big to be of use IN A MOBILE DEVICE. If a single mobile device was the only way I could ever listen to music in my life, that might be a serious consideration. Or if I couldn't change the 15 or so gigabytes of music (in my case some 45 albums) from time to time. Or if I had so much spare time to listen to music that carrying around 45 albums at once would be insufficient to fill it. DGI archived from misc.phone.mobile.iphone

0