How many mp3s do you have?

[DomCasual]

And what media player do you use?

I have 2,943 MP3s and I use Winamp.

[RhymesayersDU]

810, windows media player

[Breck Bronc]

Around 3,000. Winamp.

[Pat Bowlen]

There's about 60 gigs of music, no idea on the song count, and I use Winamp.

[Lidderer]

let's somehow turn this into a YSI thread. I'll start

[Lidderer]

"cassius clay was hit more than sonny liston/some like kk downing more than glenn tipton/ some like jim neighbors more than bobby vinton/ i like'em all"

http://s52.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=3T9NO070OW3Y71I1CH8CBZHZB3

"glenn tipton" by sun kil moon

[Bob's your Information Minister]

4,254

Winamp

[Bob's your Information Minister]

There's about 60 gigs of music, no idea on the song count, and I use Winamp.
Winamp will tell you the song count.

[Lidderer]

bob, deliver us a YSI of some obscure song that just totally infests your head space so we, or at any rate I, can get a grasp on the KC mindset.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

12,000+. Have a Yahoo Music subscription ($59 for 1 year of unlimited DLs). Should be able to DL approx. 8000 CDs in that time.

Use Winamp (access to thousands of Radio stations all over the planet including XM Satelite).

[baja]

5003 or 19.5 days of continuous music. I Tunes is my player.

[Rock Chalk]

I dont listen to a whole lot of music. The mp3s are nice but im far too lazy to make a playlist so I just listen to internet radio if I want music.

Anyway, I ave 481 songs on my PC and use winamp.

[Garcia Bronco]

And what media player do you use?

I have 2,943 MP3s and I use Winamp.


None...because MP3's ruin music.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

None...because MP3's ruin music.

And why is that?

[Rock Chalk]

And why is that?
MP3 quality is vastly inferior to CD Audio. Most people don't seem to care however.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

MP3 quality is vastly inferior to CD Audio. Most people don't seem to care however.

:) Not exactly. It depends on what bitrate it's encoded at.
The human ear (for 99% of people) cant' hear any difference in 192 and above. I've done lots of testing from the 192 to 320 range and I can't tell any difference but there are many sites that say the same thing. CD quality is supposedly 320.

All my music is 192 and above.


http://tinyurl.com/9s36d

[Dukes]

I've never used or heard of winamp before. Can anyone give me some info on it? How much does it cost?

[Rascal]

I don't know but I know it takes up 70 gigs on my hard drive

[Rock Chalk]

:) Not exactly. It depends on what bitrate it's encoded at.
The human ear (for 99% of people) cant' hear any difference in 192 and above. I've done lots of testing from the 192 to 320 range and I can't tell any difference but there are many sites that say the same thing. CD quality is supposedly 320.

All my music is 192 and above.


http://tinyurl.com/9s36d
Quality still goes down whether you can tell or not.

[Rock Chalk]

I've never used or heard of winamp before. Can anyone give me some info on it? How much does it cost?
Freeware.

http://winamp.com/

Great media player plus it has streaming radio and TV.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Quality still goes down whether you can tell or not.
If it's impossible to tell the difference, how is it "less" quality?


-------------------------------------------

A polar bear in a snow storm

Human hearing is a fantastically sensitive system, but it does have some peculiar quirks and limitations. These perceptual limitations, or psychoacoustic phenomena, are what allows for much of the compression in MP3 encoding. For instance, hearing is bandwidth limited. Most people know that the range of human hearing can span 20 Hz to 20 kHz, but this actually only applies to a small percentage of the population. Our ability to hear high frequencies diminishes with age, so the typical range of hearing for someone in their 20s is closer to 20 Hz to 16 kHz.

In addition, our hearing sensitivity is frequency dependent. It is least sensitive at the frequency extremes and most sensitive from 1 kHz to 5 kHz, which non-coincidentally is the range of the typical human voice. Also -- now this one’s crucial -- there is a phenomena known as masking where loud tones mask softer tones that are similar in frequency, making them inaudible; this masking tone can also affect the perception of sounds which slightly precede or come immediately after it. A model of these psychoacoustic phenomena can be used to estimate what part of an audio signal is audible and what isn't.

The practical upshot of this is that information that cannot be heard doesn’t need to be encoded. It’s like a white painting of a polar bear in a snow storm. If it’s snowing hard, you don’t need to draw every aspect of the bear.

Here's a simplified description of what happens under the hood of a MP3 encoder. In the first step, PCM audio (44.1 kHz, 16-bits, two channels) is transformed into its frequency components and separated into sub-bands. The bit rate is fixed at some value which is lower than the bit rate of compact disc digital audio (about 1.4 Mbs), so the number of bits we can allocate to quantize these sub-bands is limited. It’s the psychoacoustic model which looks at the frequency bands and determines the bit allocation. For example, bands which are being masked by loud sounds can have fewer bits because we are less likely to hear quantization noise (or errors) in these bands. Forward and backward masking is also taken into account to determine this quantization noise threshold. The data is then encoded into the proper bitstream that can be read by an MP3 decoder. So while at a specified bit rate all the encoders have the same number of bits to play with, it’s the differences in the psychoacoustic model and the resulting bit allocation that determines the audible and measurable dissimilarities of the encoders.

Do MP3 encoders sound different? (http://tinyurl.com/b6rjm)

[Rock Chalk]

If it's impossible to tell the difference, how is it "less" quality?



If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to see it, does it make a sound?

Just because you cant tell the difference doesn't mean the quality isn't diminished. You cant her the elephant's vocal range because it is ultrasonic but that doesnt mean they dont have a vocal range.

[Ray Finkle]

I have about 3K and use Itunes....

[broncoholic]

I have about 3000, and I use Acoustica for burning, and windows media player for listening.

[scorpio]

All I've got is a banjo and a hound-dog.

[Nuggets4]

9,000+ (all legal) and iTunes.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to see it, does it make a sound?


No, in fact, it doesn't even fall as far as anyone knows.

It's easy enough to test for a difference though as the links I posted show.

[scorpio]

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to see it, does it make a sound?

Heisenburg would say that the tree doesn't exist if nobody is observing it.

[BMF Bronco]

982 on my ipod, nothing on my computer, I stole the ones from a buddy's laptop. But he uses Itunes

[Jens1893]

4,500 ... roughly 23 gig

[Garcia Bronco]

:) Not exactly. It depends on what bitrate it's encoded at.
The human ear (for 99% of people) cant' hear any difference in 192 and above. I've done lots of testing from the 192 to 320 range and I can't tell any difference but there are many sites that say the same thing. CD quality is supposedly 320.

All my music is 192 and above.


http://tinyurl.com/9s36d


It's still a lossy format...ergo...it ruins your music.

[Garcia Bronco]

No, in fact, it doesn't even fall as far as anyone knows.

It's easy enough to test for a difference though as the links I posted show.


LOL...you'd argue with a tree stump.

[Ray Finkle]

It's still a lossy format...ergo...it ruins your music.


may be true but I take a slight drop in quality in order to have an entire collection worth in the palm of my hands or be able to be listened to throughout the entire house with the click of a mouse...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

It's still a lossy format...ergo...it ruins your music.

I provided the links that show the human ear can't tell the difference between properly ripped and encoded CDs and the CD itself. Have any evidence to show otherwise?

[Garcia Bronco]

I provided the links that show the human ear can't tell the difference between properly ripped and encoded CDs and the CD itself. Have any evidence to show otherwise?


I can tell the difference every time...and I've told you time and again...I don't care what links you or anybody provides to try an d validate any point...links to studies are just as easily bull**** as anything else..Botton line it still ruins your music by tossing data it cannot compress...there is no way around it for you. Mp3's ruin music...end of story.

[Garcia Bronco]

may be true but I take a slight drop in quality in order to have an entire collection worth in the palm of my hands or be able to be listened to throughout the entire house with the click of a mouse...

As long as you know that you are...but what about if you legally pass the music on to someone else....do they understand? It's a tainted product at that point. Did the person you bought your MP3's from tell you that the MP3's you purchased were damaged copies of the music you purchased?

[Garcia Bronco]

I provided the links that show the human ear can't tell the difference between properly ripped and encoded CDs and the CD itself. Have any evidence to show otherwise?


And btw...the "study" you have listed is on studio produced music...that's not the only kind of produced music out there. There is also live audience and live soundboard music out there. Go listen to an Mp3 of a ripped audience copy of a concert and tell me you can't hear the difference in the MP3's.

[Ray Finkle]

As long as you know that you are...but what about if you legally pass the music on to someone else....do they understand? It's a tainted product at that point. Did the person you bought your MP3's from tell you that the MP3's you purchased were damaged copies of the music you purchased?


I knew they were as clear as other mediums....but 85% of my music has been taken off CD's I own....

[theedge111]

im close to 600g's of U2(all lossless, mp3's suck!), i've got almost every live show from the Zoo Tour, Popmart, Elevation, and Vertigo Tour.

Winamp for a player.

[Garcia Bronco]

I knew they were as clear as other mediums....

The only mediums I'll trade in are FLAC and Shorten

[Ray Finkle]

The only mediums I'll trade in are FLAC and Shorten


that should have read weren't as clear....

[ludo21]

0, i just listen to my CD's.

[No1BroncoFan]

Winamp and a CD/MP3 player. Song count? I have no idea, but every CD I own gets converted to MP3. It's very nice to put in a Tool MP3 CD, hit random and listen for hours without having to change out the CD.

Ben

[Bronco_Beerslug]

And btw...the "study" you have listed is on studio produced music...that's not the only kind of produced music out there. There is also live audience and live soundboard music out there. Go listen to an Mp3 of a ripped audience copy of a concert and tell me you can't hear the difference in the MP3's.

I think I've bought 1 live concert CD in over 30 years. I want to hear studio produced music on my CDs, I'll go see them live if I want to hear a concert.

[Garcia Bronco]

I think I've bought 1 live concert CD in over 30 years. I want to hear studio produced music on my CDs, I'll go see them live if I want to hear a concert.


I disagree...studio music is exactly that....studio..it's exact...take after take doubled over and processed. Live music is where the magic is and the true test of a composer and musician. You can always tell a good band by the live performance canned or improv. Brother there is a whole world out there you are not even aware of. But I can't explain it to you...you have to realize for yourself.

[Rohirrim]

I don't have any Mp3s. I can't get them to work on my 8 track.

[Pezman]

Well, my current list stands at 14,000+ mp3's at almost 95 gigs. But of that, only 13,995 are worthy of listening to (I mean, cmon, how many of us still have not one, but FIVE Sonny and Cher songs in their MP3 collection. The horror!

My player of choice has always been Winamp and my mp3 editor is the godlike Mediamonkey. Bless that nifty little progger.

[anthonypacino]

Well, my current list stands at 14,000+ mp3's at almost 95 gigs. But of that, only 13,995 are worthy of listening to (I mean, cmon, how many of us still have not one, but FIVE Sonny and Cher songs in their MP3 collection. The horror!

My player of choice has always been Winamp and my mp3 editor is the godlike Mediamonkey. Bless that nifty little progger.
holy crap Pezzy, I have ripped my entire CD collection and used a portable HD to download about 1000other songs from friends, I have a hard time remembering what song I want or need, the best thing that has worked for me is to stay up late and watch one of those Time-Life commercials and write the songs down I like. Or if somebody reccomends something to me.

[DomCasual]

Well, my current list stands at 14,000+ mp3's at almost 95 gigs. But of that, only 13,995 are worthy of listening to (I mean, cmon, how many of us still have not one, but FIVE Sonny and Cher songs in their MP3 collection. The horror!
I got you, babe!

I think we would all be embarrassed to have someone look at our mp3 collection. Everyone has their shameless pleasures.

That actually makes for another good topic. List some shameless pleasures in your mp3 collection. Some of mine:

Everything Barry Manilow
Britney Spears - Oops I Did It Again
Britney Spears - Hit Me Baby One More Time
A bunch of Air Supply
A bunch of Abba
That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[scorpio]

I got you, babe!

I think we would all be embarrassed to have someone look at our mp3 collection. Everyone has their shameless pleasures.

That actually makes for another good topic. List some shameless pleasures in your mp3 collection. Some of mine:

Everything Barry Manilow
Britney Spears - Oops I Did It Again
Britney Spears - Hit Me Baby One More Time
A bunch of Air Supply
A bunch of Abba
That's just the tip of the iceberg.

I have both editions of Celtic Woman 8')

[Hulamau]

140GB and very little MP3 mostly FLAC, Ogg Vorbis or Monkey lossless compression.

highly compressed lossy music is akin to finger nails on a chalk board when played through a decent system.

Most people it seems are content to go deaf with tiny ear buds turned to volume 10 listening to grunge-rap so quality has no meaning for them anyway.

[DomCasual]

You guys are a bunch of music snobs.

I, for one, can tell little difference between "high-quality" music and "low-quality" music, and I think that I am not atypical in that.

Then again, I admitted that I had "Oops, I Did It Again!" in my music collection, so what do I know?

[DB-Freak]

You guys are a bunch of music snobs.

I, for one, can tell little difference between "high-quality" music and "low-quality" music, and I think that I am not atypical in that.

Then again, I admitted that I had "Oops, I Did It Again!" in my music collection, so what do I know?
Heay dosage of Pantera to regrow your balls back.

[Dr. Broncenstein]

220 gigs high bitrate full album

[Hulamau]

Depends on the type of music and the play back gear whether or not you can hear the difference. But once you learn to hear the very noticable difference on good gear, you can hear it even on crappy gear.

The motto here, if you love MP-3 music don't play it on a high end system :-).

The only thing that matters with music is does it do it for you?

The little bit about a generation of IPOD heads going deaf is certainly true as well.

[RMT]

2908 and counting

[Northman]

I use Winamp and i have 6332 just for my metal which isnt even updated yet so there is more to come.

http://www.geocities.com/mr_djanubis/AnubisMp3list.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I disagree...studio music is exactly that....studio..it's exact...take after take doubled over and processed. Live music is where the magic is and the true test of a composer and musician. You can always tell a good band by the live performance canned or improv. Brother there is a whole world out there you are not even aware of. But I can't explain it to you...you have to realize for yourself.

You can't explain it to me because I've already been there and done that (all before you could say mama). :thumbs:

[Northman]

You can't explain it to me because I've already been there and done that (all before you could say mama). :thumbs:


Im with you BB, i prefer Studio work over Live. Live is sooo overrated. it really comes down to the soundman and not the band itself. Although there are some bands i like they are great live its always because they have a great soundman. but, since i prefer not to go to many shows i enjoy the studio albums and fantastic polished works of said bands. :thumbsup:

[Garcia Bronco]

it really comes down to the soundman and not the band itself. Although there :

Studio music has a soundman too dunderhead...all the UVA lovin has rotted your brain.8')

[Northman]

Studio music has a soundman too dunderhead...all the UVA lovin has rotted your brain.8')


Nah, im aware of that but people seem to think that Live is just on the band when it is not. if your soundman is ****ty your live show is ****ty. I just prefer listening to the clear production on a compact disc. dunderhead. LOL

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Im with you BB, i prefer Studio work over Live. Live is sooo overrated. it really comes down to the soundman and not the band itself. Although there are some bands i like they are great live its always because they have a great soundman. but, since i prefer not to go to many shows i enjoy the studio albums and fantastic polished works of said bands. :thumbsup:

I just don't get paying for recorded live music when you can have superb studio production.

I've been attending more symphony performances later in life and I must say some have been truly wonderful!

[Garcia Bronco]

I just don't get paying for recorded live music when you can have superb studio production.

I've been attending more symphony performances later in life and I must say some have been truly wonderful!


Whoaaa....who said anything about pay?

[Odysseus]

I disagree...studio music is exactly that....studio..it's exact...take after take doubled over and processed. Live music is where the magic is and the true test of a composer and musician. You can always tell a good band by the live performance canned or improv. Brother there is a whole world out there you are not even aware of. But I can't explain it to you...you have to realize for yourself.

There is no comparison of live performance music and studio stuff...ZERO. It is the whole reason why the unplugged series did so well in that you got a chance to really here the music stripped out live.

I would love to be a music snob but I ain't...yet.

[Odysseus]

All that said....What MP3 PLAYERS support FLAC?

[Odysseus]

Im with you BB, i prefer Studio work over Live. Live is sooo overrated. it really comes down to the soundman and not the band itself. Although there are some bands i like they are great live its always because they have a great soundman. but, since i prefer not to go to many shows i enjoy the studio albums and fantastic polished works of said bands. :thumbsup:

There are very few groups that sound good both LIVE and in the studio. A good soundman cannot account for a guy whose just not on that night. A live concert in Detroit is never going to be like a live concert in Denver. It's just not the same.

Go to Central City up at 9,000 feet and go see Central City Opera. It's opera in English btw and is engaging. The full experience does not compare to the best CD IMHO but even their best recorded version lacks the energy and full palette. I love live FOR LIVE but I agree the studio stuff is great too.:thumbs:

[Northman]

There are very few groups that sound good both LIVE and in the studio. A good soundman cannot account for a guy whose just not on that night. A live concert in Detroit is never going to be like a live concert in Denver. It's just not the same.

Go to Central City up at 9,000 feet and go see Central City Opera. It's opera in English btw and is engaging. The full experience does not compare to the best CD IMHO but even their best recorded version lacks the energy and full palette. I love live FOR LIVE but I agree the studio stuff is great too.:thumbs:

I will agree with you on that. The Clash of the Titans tour in 90' at Red Rocks was just OUTSTANDING. ;D

[Odysseus]

I will agree with you on that. The Clash of the Titans tour in 90' at Red Rocks was just OUTSTANDING. ;D

There is NOTHING that compares to a concert at Red Rocks. When Fiddler's green opened up everyone trumpted the return of open air concerts. It was akin to revitalizing drive in movies. What were they thinking with that place!Ha!

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Garcia, saying mp3 ruins music is like saying the Divx format ruins video. It's simply not true. At best, it is personal preference.

I cannot tell the difference between CDs I listen to and CDs that I rip. In fact, I don't listen to CDs anymore.


I got you, babe!

I think we would all be embarrassed to have someone look at our mp3 collection. Everyone has their shameless pleasures.


Oh god. I could contribute to this. I have two Barry Manilow songs. And bunch of stuff by Heart. :flower:

[ZachKC]

http://www.last.fm/user/ZachIsHere/

[Nuggets4]

You guys are a bunch of music snobs.

Damn right.

[Garcia Bronco]

Garcia, saying mp3 ruins music is like saying the


Mp3 compression ruins the music....it's a FACT that the compression tosses data the format cannot compress. It's a FACT. Anyone who claims that MP3's do not sully the copy of the music are flaming retards. Are you a flaming..reta..err.nevermind...wrong person to ask. Everytime you convert music to MP3 you lose a little bit more of the original source.

Axiom: You can never get any better than the source. The further away you get from the source, the worse the copy.

[Odysseus]

Well, my current list stands at 14,000+ mp3's at almost 95 gigs. But of that, only 13,995 are worthy of listening to (I mean, cmon, how many of us still have not one, but FIVE Sonny and Cher songs in their MP3 collection. The horror!

My player of choice has always been Winamp and my mp3 editor is the godlike Mediamonkey. Bless that nifty little progger.

Mediamonkey is cool. Thanks for the tip.

http://www.mediamonkey.com/

I am still trying to find a portable MP3 player that does FLAC or OGG. What good is having this really cool file structure and you are playing it like a close and play record player?

http://www.ciao.co.uk/Portable_MP3_Players_5266512_3-flac RIO Karma

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Mp3 compression ruins the music....it's a FACT that the compression tosses data the format cannot compress. It's a FACT. Anyone who claims that MP3's do not sully the copy of the music are flaming retards. Are you a flaming..reta..err.nevermind...wrong person to ask. Everytime you convert music to MP3 you lose a little bit more of the original source.

Axiom: You can never get any better than the source. The further away you get from the source, the worse the copy.

Show me your proof and "facts" that ripping and encoding correctly "ruins" your music ("you flaming retard").

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Mp3 compression ruins the music....it's a FACT that the compression tosses data the format cannot compress. It's a FACT. Anyone who claims that MP3's do not sully the copy of the music are flaming retards. Are you a flaming..reta..err.nevermind...wrong person to ask. Everytime you convert music to MP3 you lose a little bit more of the original source.

Axiom: You can never get any better than the source. The further away you get from the source, the worse the copy.

You have some fact in your post, and some opinion.

It is your OPINION that mp3 ruins the music. It is FACT that it modifies it.

Many people, myself included, cannot tell the difference. I listened to the Revenge of the Sith soundtrack CD ONCE before ripping it to mp3 and I am no worse off. I have ZERO desire to pop in the CD or re-rip it.

[Odysseus]

Show me your proof and "facts" that ripping and encoding correctly "ruins" your music ("you flaming retard").

Go to a copy machine. Take a copy of you ass. Take the copy of your ass and make a copy of it. Do this 100 times. Post that here. Do it for Bob.

[broncosteven]

Show me your proof and "facts" that ripping and encoding correctly "ruins" your music ("you flaming retard").


Garcia is correct. I am at work & can't afford time for another long winded post but the nature of MP3 is to COMPRESS the data stream & when you introduce compression you lose signal headroom. No longer having the original Signal headroom you no longer have a true copy of the master.

Most MP3's compress only to the level of human hearing so you will not notice much loss between the copy & original unless you played them side by side on a highend system.

I for one have a huge CD collection & don't rip MP3's much they are a step up from Cassette tapes but not as good as CD's. I actually wish they would record DVD's at higher frequencies than CD roms so we could get closer to live concert experience.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Most MP3's compress only to the level of human hearing so you will not notice much loss between the copy & original unless you played them side by side on a highend system.


EXACTLY.

[broncosteven]

EXACTLY.


It still hoses up the quality as it lowers the overall signal depth. Compression is a bad thing when applied to a finished product.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

It still hoses up the quality as it lowers the overall signal depth. Compression is a bad thing when applied to a finished product.

If I can't tell the difference, I don't care.

[RaiderH8r]

I have just enough MP3s to piss off Metallica and, more importantly, Lars. That makes me happy. When Metallica resurrects Cliff Burton and worships him as their God and the only thing Metal about Metallica I MIGHT let them off the top of the sh!t list. Instead _____lica chooses to piss on his grave and crap on his genius.

[RaiderH8r]

It still hoses up the quality as it lowers the overall signal depth. Compression is a bad thing when applied to a finished product.
I'm a guy who still enjoys listening to vinyl so I'm not too angst ridden about compression and such. Ass kicking music is ass kicking music no matter the medium.

[Garcia Bronco]

If I can't tell the difference, I don't care.


That's fine...but don't push your MP3 garbage to anyone else as being quality replications of the music.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

That's fine...but don't push your MP3 garbage to anyone else as being quality replications of the music.

It's all opinion.

[RaiderH8r]

It's all opinion.
I have a fact for you:

Chiefs Suck. Not opinion, just fact.

[Odysseus]

Garcia is correct. I am at work & can't afford time for another long winded post but the nature of MP3 is to COMPRESS the data stream & when you introduce compression you lose signal headroom. No longer having the original Signal headroom you no longer have a true copy of the master.

Most MP3's compress only to the level of human hearing so you will not notice much loss between the copy & original unless you played them side by side on a highend system.

I for one have a huge CD collection & don't rip MP3's much they are a step up from Cassette tapes but not as good as CD's. I actually wish they would record DVD's at higher frequencies than CD roms so we could get closer to live concert experience.

:thumbsup:

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Garcia is correct. I am at work & can't afford time for another long winded post but the nature of MP3 is to COMPRESS the data stream & when you introduce compression you lose signal headroom. No longer having the original Signal headroom you no longer have a true copy of the master.

Most MP3's compress only to the level of human hearing so you will not notice much loss between the copy & original unless you played them side by side on a highend system.

I for one have a huge CD collection & don't rip MP3's much they are a step up from Cassette tapes but not as good as CD's. I actually wish they would record DVD's at higher frequencies than CD roms so we could get closer to live concert experience.

This is the prevailing myth which is incorrect as I've linked to the tests that show CDs ripped and encoded properly are basically impossible to tell any difference.
If your ears can't find any difference then the sound quality is not degraded.


http://www.lincomatic.com/mp3/mp3quality.html

[Garcia Bronco]

It's all opinion.


It's not opinion Mp3's remove data from the file...quit being obtuse.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

It's not opinion Mp3's remove data from the file...quit being obtuse.
Didn't say that was your opinion.

It is your opinion that that removal is noticeable to the average user. It's not.

[Jori]

I have about 800 mp3s on my Archos AV500 and about 1000 or so on my PC.

[Garcia Bronco]

This is the prevailing myth which is incorrect as I've linked to the tests that show CDs ripped and encoded properly are basically impossible to tell any difference.
If your ears can't find any difference then the sound quality is not degraded.


http://www.lincomatic.com/mp3/mp3quality.html


I've already told you I can hear the difference and your "study" is flawed in the regard to it's test subject.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I've already told you I can hear the difference and your "study" is flawed in the regard to it's test subject.
Show me how it's flawed, I've asked you twice now to provide some proof. You can't seem to understand the limits of human hearing and how it relates to the range of sound we can actually hear.

Have you actually ripped and encoded a CD with the tools in the link?

[Garcia Bronco]

Didn't say that was your opinion.

It is your opinion that that removal is noticeable to the average user. It's not.

That some users don't notice or are unaware of the flaw in the product makes the crime of perpetuating MP3 fraud all the worse. Mp3's at that very worst are fraudulent copies of music....to circulate them at best is dubious.

[Garcia Bronco]

Show me how it's flawed, I've asked you twice now to provide some proof. You can't seem to understand the limits of human hearing and how it relates to the range of sound we can actually hear.

Have you actually ripped and encoded a CD with the tools in the link?

I told you...the sample they used was that of studio recorded music...there are other forms of downloadable music out there where the ear can hear the difference. Like I said...you'd argue with a tree stump about it being short and made of wood.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

I told you...the sample they used was that of studio recorded music...there are other forms of downloadable music out there where the ear can hear the difference. Like I said...you'd argue with a tree stump about it being short and made of wood.

Well, gee, sure. I can compress an mp3 to a bitrate so low that it WILL sound like ****.

I'm not going to do that though. I'm going to compress it to a bitrate where it sounds just as good as it does on the CD. Which is possible, and MOST PEOPLE are happy with that.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I told you...the sample they used was that of studio recorded music...there are other forms of downloadable music out there where the ear can hear the difference. Like I said...you'd argue with a tree stump about it being short and made of wood.

And I told you that 99% of people can't hear any difference between a properly ripped and encoded CD from the original, are you agreeing or not?

[Garcia Bronco]

Well, gee, sure. I can compress an mp3 to a bitrate so low that it WILL sound like ****.

I'm not going to do that though. I'm going to compress it to a bitrate where it sounds just as good as it does on the CD. Which is possible, and MOST PEOPLE are happy with that.


You can call it whatever you wish...but at the end of the day your MP3 collection is a collection of damaged music.

[Garcia Bronco]

And I told you that 99% of people can't hear any difference between a properly ripped Studio Music and encoded CD from the original studio master, are you agreeing or not?


I fixed your post.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You can call it whatever you wish...but at the end of the day your MP3 collection is a collection of damaged music.

Man, you'd argue with a KC knob!

I fixed your post.
I know that's easier for you than admitting you're wrong.
:yayaya:

[Garcia Bronco]

Man, you'd argue with a KC knob!

Hilarious!

[Bob's your Information Minister]

You can call it whatever you wish...but at the end of the day your MP3 collection is a collection of damaged music.
It's a collection of "modified" music. It's been "modified" so it doesn't take up as much space on my damn hard drive. These "modifications" to the music are so minute, you can't really discern any changes.

And I don't even bother with mp3s under 128 kbps.

[Garcia Bronco]

Man, you'd argue with a KC knob!


I know that's easier for you than admitting you're wrong.
:yayaya:


I'm not wrong...you are just talking about one subset of the music converted to MP3.

[Garcia Bronco]

It's a collection of "modified" music. It's been "modified" so it doesn't take up as much space on my damn hard drive. These "modifications" to the music are so minute, you can't really discern any changes.


"modified" in a way that cannot be reversed.....modified in an irreversible way...a negative way is damaged. It's damaged music...I can understand that you paid money for some of this music and are feeling cheated upon hearing the truth...it's okay....you have a lawsuit IMO. But you know what they say about a fool and his money.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

"modified" in a way that cannot be reversed.....modified in an irreversible way...a negative way is damaged. It's damaged music...I can understand that you paid money for some of this music and are feeling cheated upon hearing the truth...it's okay....you have a lawsuit IMO. But you know what they say about a fool and his money.

You fool. I paid for my CDs. I could easily re-rip to a lossless format if I cared.

And I don't pay for mp3s that I download.

[Garcia Bronco]

You fool. I paid for my CDs. I could easily re-rip to a lossless format if I cared.

And I don't pay for mp3s that I download.


Alright...so you're making your "music" portable that's cool. Whatever...but don't delude yourself into thinking it's not negatively impacted the music even though you can't hear it.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Alright...so you're making your "music" portable that's cool. Whatever...but don't delude yourself into thinking it's not negatively impacted the music even though you can't hear it.

"Negative" is an interpretation of the modification.

I don't find it negative. Not in the least.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

Hey Garcia, do you listen to the radio?

[RaiderH8r]

Who pays for music? WTF?

[Nuggets4]

I read a great interview with Eddie Kramer (engineered some of the greatest albums ever made) and he was talking about how MP3s are ruining an entire generation. It's not just on high end systems either. I can notice the difference on my car stereo and it's the damn Toyota factory speakers.

[RaiderH8r]

I read a great interview with Eddie Kramer (engineered some of the greatest albums ever made) and he was talking about how MP3s are ruining an entire generation. It's not just on high end systems either. I can notice the difference on my car stereo and it's the damn Toyota factory speakers.
Yeah, it's the MP3s that are ruining music. It couldn't possibly be that the industry spews out garbage. No, it's worse than garbage. It's the sh!t in the garbage that makes you say, "Jesus Christ, who sh!t in the garbage. That garbage wreaks and makes me want to puke. Good God shoot me now to get me away from that wreaking, stinking, slime ridden, sewage filled, gutter trash, dingleberry ridden diarrhea that is today's modern music industry and product."

That's the problem....in my most humble opinion.

People who produce music this bad should be shot.

[Garcia Bronco]

Hey Garcia, do you listen to the radio?


Heck no...

[Garcia Bronco]

"Negative" is an interpretation of the modification.

I don't find it negative. Not in the least.


It's most certainly negative when you consider it subtracts pieces of the music...it takes it out...and doesn't put it back...that's bad....really bad.

[Nuggets4]

Yeah, it's the MP3s that are ruining music. It couldn't possibly be that the industry spews out garbage. No, it's worse than garbage. It's the sh!t in the garbage that makes you say, "Jesus Christ, who sh!t in the garbage. That garbage wreaks and makes me want to puke. Good God shoot me now to get me away from that wreaking, stinking, slime ridden, sewage filled, gutter trash, dingleberry ridden diarrhea that is today's modern music industry and product."

That's the problem....in my most humble opinion.

That's fine and dandy, but it has nothing to do with the audio quality which is what we're all talking about.

People who produce music this bad should be shot.

Go look up Kramer's resume, then prepare to edit this comment.

[Garcia Bronco]

That's fine and dandy, but it has nothing to do with the audio quality which is what we're all talking about.



Go look up Kramer's resume, then prepare to edit this comment.


Hey 3000...congrats

[RaiderH8r]

That's fine and dandy, but it has nothing to do with the audio quality which is what we're all talking about.



Go look up Kramer's resume, then prepare to edit this comment.
Audio quality is one thing. Polishing a turd and selling it as gold is another. I'm willing to sacrifice a modicum of sound quality for convenience and peace of mind. Toting an iPod is a lot easier than hauling around 3K+ cds and not having to worry about your sh!t getting boosted. I must have bought most of my cd's 2-3 times over the course of my life. Fvcking pisses me off.

I wasn't speaking about Kramer specifically, just in general. Whoever, in good conscience can produce and market this crap today should be shot because they are pure evil. Sure, there are a couple of nooks and crannies of good music, but by and large I want to puke.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I read a great interview with Eddie Kramer (engineered some of the greatest albums ever made) and he was talking about how MP3s are ruining an entire generation. It's not just on high end systems either. I can notice the difference on my car stereo and it's the damn Toyota factory speakers.

He's talking about MP3s encoded for trading on the internet.
Even Garcia admits that the human ear can't tell the difference between properly ripped and encoded CDs from their original.

[scorpio]

Damaged, modified, whatever. I just don't get understand your zealousness about this, Garcia. You're acting like someone listening to an MP3 is akin to peeing in your own personal pool. It's not like MP3s are an infectious disease that will reach out and destroy all music in the world (oh noes!). If you don't listen to MP3s, then what's the problem?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Damaged, modified, whatever. I just don't get understand your zealousness about this, Garcia. You're acting like someone listening to an MP3 is akin to peeing in your own personal pool. It's not like MP3s are an infectious disease that will reach out and destroy all music in the world (oh noes!). If you don't listen to MP3s, then what's the problem?

He's just like the mullethead hound dog....chasing a rabbit all day long but never catching him.

[Garcia Bronco]

He's talking about MP3s encoded for trading on the internet.
Even Garcia admits that the human ear can't tell the difference between properly ripped and encoded CDs from their original.


Of Studio music...I think it's hard to tell...but that doesn't mean you can't tell.

[Garcia Bronco]

Damaged, modified, whatever. I just don't get understand your zealousness about this, Garcia. You're acting like someone listening to an MP3 is akin to peeing in your own personal pool. It's not like MP3s are an infectious disease that will reach out and destroy all music in the world (oh noes!). If you don't listen to MP3s, then what's the problem?

What I'm saying is...you can't pass off MP3's as orginal quality copies of the music...it's just a fact.


"It's not like MP3s are an infectious disease that will reach out and destroy all music in the world"

Although over the top...that's exactly what it's done....we have several people in this thread alone that think they've got quality copies of their music in MP3's. :) If you want me to shut up about it...don't disagree with me.

[RaiderH8r]

What I'm saying is...you can't pass off MP3's as orginal quality copies of the music...it's just a fact.


"It's not like MP3s are an infectious disease that will reach out and destroy all music in the world"

Although over the top...that's exactly what it's done....we have several people in this thread alone that think they've got quality copies of their music in MP3's. :) If you want me to shut up about it...don't disagree with me.
So is an original vinyl press not a quality copy because of it's lack of audio clarity respective to CDs?

Audio clarity doesn't mean sh!t if the music sucks. It just makes it easier to hear a crappier product.

[Garcia Bronco]

So is an original vinyl press not a quality copy because of it's lack of audio clarity respective to CDs?

.


No vinyl is not a quality copy compared to digitally master copies. That's a no brainer. Vinyl is a vintage medium much like 8-track and audio cassette.

****ty music is a whole other topic...there is a lot of ****ty music out there....there always has been...and there always will be...but you have to respect the artist for giving it a shot.

[RaiderH8r]

No vinyl is not a quality copy compared to digitally master copies. That's a no brainer. Vinyl is a vintage medium much like 8-track and audio cassette.

****ty music is a whole other topic...there is a lot of ****ty music out there....there always has been...and there always will be...but you have to respect the artist for giving it a shot.
No I don't. Writing a crappy tune does not warrant my respect. I can write a crappy tune in a New York minute but I know better than to subject the world to my half baked musical whims conceived in a youthful effort to get some chick to buy into my bullsh!t sentimentality and get laid. Instead I just give'em a good old fashioned donkey punch and be done with it.

But all seriousness aside, I'm not too hung up on the sound quality, unless it's an absolute abomination, because I like the nostalgia a true vinyl sound provides. Among other things. Take Lead Belly or Robert Johnson, sound quality is pure sh!t on it's best day, but they kick the ever loving sh!t out of the 99% of the musicians ever to take up the trade. Musical quality is the standard, sound quality is just the gilding the lilly.

[Garcia Bronco]

Musical quality is the standard, sound quality is just the gilding the lilly.

A. That's a big 1 percent

B. Sound quality is key..what good are the horns if you can't hear it....what good is the trill on the fret board if you can't notice it? How can the sound fill the room without the low-end accompany? What good is the Musical quailty if you can't hear it? You're talking about a symbotic relationship...one can't exist without the other.

[RhymesayersDU]

The moral of the story is, download mp3's in 320 kbs. I refuse to burn a CD that isn't 320.

For music that won't be burnt, singles, whatever, that just stay on my computer, I don't like anything under 192, but will take some.

[RaiderH8r]

A. That's a big 1 percent

B. Sound quality is key..what good are the horns if you can't hear it....what good is the trill on the fret board if you can't notice it? How can the sound fill the room without the low-end accompany? What good is the Musical quailty if you can't hear it? You're talking about a symbotic relationship...one can't exist without the other.
I was being accomodating in my 1%.

I can notice those things on mp3s and I think that's the crux of this disagreement.

And, in the end, I'd rather have poorly recorded greatness than great recordings of pure crap.

But as long as I'm able to listen to what I want, how I want, in a fashion I want everything else is academic.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What I'm saying is...you can't pass off MP3's as orginal quality copies of the music...it's just a fact.


You CAN make copies that are indistinguishable (b. Impossible to discern; imperceptible: a sound that was indistinguishable to the human ear.) from the original so what's your point again?

[Garcia Bronco]

I was being accomodating in my 1%.

I can notice those things on mp3s and I think that's the crux of this disagreement.

And, in the end, I'd rather have poorly recorded greatness than great recordings of pure crap.

But as long as I'm able to listen to what I want, how I want, in a fashion I want everything else is academic.



I would rather have great recordings of greatness

[Garcia Bronco]

You CAN make copies that are indistinguishable (b. Impossible to discern; imperceptible: a sound that was indistinguishable to the human ear.) from the original so what's your point again?


That music converted to MP3's are tainted whether you Bronco_Beerslug can hear it or not. Ergo MP3's ruin music.

[Nuggets4]

Hey 3000...congrats

Can't believe I wasted it on this. Thanks though.

The moral of the story is, download mp3's in 320 kbs. I refuse to burn a CD that isn't 320.

Or you could just BUY THE DAMN CD!

[RhymesayersDU]

Or you could just BUY THE DAMN CD!

Uh... no hablo ingles.

[sisterhellfyre]

I disagree...studio music is exactly that....studio..it's exact...take after take doubled over and processed. Live music is where the magic is and the true test of a composer and musician. You can always tell a good band by the live performance canned or improv.

FWIW, GB, I agree with you. I like studio music, and I like live music, but I don't care for recorded live music. Very few "live" albums really capture the sound and the vibe of the musicians on stage. I've purchased thousands of albums and CDs since the mid-70s, but only a handful of "live" albums. They're just not worth the money. (Tho watching a concert from VHS or DVD comes closer, but the audio quality on those is often even worse than the "live" albums.)

Current stash: 829 MP3s (160 kbps & up), and Winamp.

Regards,
m.

[sisterhellfyre]

I got you, babe!

That actually makes for another good topic. List some shameless pleasures in your mp3 collection.

A few tracks each by Spice Girls, Barry Manilow & BeeGees.

Yeesh -- did I just confess to that in public???

Regards,
m.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Can't believe I wasted it on this. Thanks though.
Or you could just BUY THE DAMN CD!

Or, just get you 1 year of unlimited DLs for $59.95.

[Garcia Bronco]

FWIW, GB, I agree with you. I like studio music, and I like live music, but I don't care for recorded live music. Very few "live" albums really capture the sound and the vibe of the musicians on stage. I've purchased thousands of albums and CDs since the mid-70s, but only a handful of "live" albums. They're just not worth the money. (Tho watching a concert from VHS or DVD comes closer, but the audio quality on those is often even worse than the "live" albums.)

Current stash: 829 MP3s (160 kbps & up), and Winamp.

Regards,
m.

I'm on a different tip

...I have almost nothing but live albums and concerts. In my Grateful Dead collection alone I have about 400 CD...about 3 CD's make up one show....some good...some bad. I own maybe some 15-20 MP3's of a show I just couldn't find any where else. Studio albums are cool...but there is nothing like 20 versions of the same tune played over a 5 year span at live shows...some good...some great...some a little bit of every-damn-thing within the context of those 20 different shows from different seasons, in different places, all with the same sub plot but tweaked just to fit the situation. It's a great thing from my perspective as a person who plays music.

Writing good music is a difficult thing...laying down the perfect song for record is an accomplishment. I respect those that do it...I respect people that get up in front of an audience and blow the doors of the place just a bit more. I'd also like a copy of that performance. and please no MP3's...they could taint a performance that was special.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

we have several people in this thread alone that think they've got quality copies of their music in MP3's. :) If you want me to shut up about it...don't disagree with me.

It's all opinion. Most people are happy with mp3s and think they sound great and can't tell the difference. I guess that makes us stupid.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

The moral of the story is, download mp3's in 320 kbs. I refuse to burn a CD that isn't 320.

For music that won't be burnt, singles, whatever, that just stay on my computer, I don't like anything under 192, but will take some.

The human ear can't really tell the difference above 128 kbps.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

That music converted to MP3's are tainted whether you Bronco_Beerslug can hear it or not. Ergo MP3's ruin music.

IN YOUR OPINION

[Bob's your Information Minister]

...I have almost nothing but live albums and concerts..

Then you are a hypocrite. Most live music recordings sound like ass compared to a clean studio job.

I have very little live stuff because I think it sounds like ass. That is my OPINION. Just like you have your OPINION.

[Malcontent]

Then you are a hypocrite. Most live music recordings sound like ass compared to a clean studio job.

I have very little live stuff because I think it sounds like ass. That is my OPINION. Just like you have your OPINION.

You say "Ass" way too much Bob!

[Maximus]

8,045 ( All Leagal ) and counting... I just added 23 tonight. I am in the process of converting my Vinal collection to digital ( I'm using magic music studios software for that ) Itunes

[Maximus]

Depends on the type of music and the play back gear whether or not you can hear the difference. But once you learn to hear the very noticable difference on good gear, you can hear it even on crappy gear.

The motto here, if you love MP-3 music don't play it on a high end system :-).

The only thing that matters with music is does it do it for you?

The little bit about a generation of IPOD heads going deaf is certainly true as well.

You'll never catch me with those ****ty earbuds in my ears. For anyone who listens to music seriously, you must have real headphones to maintain the sound and your ears. I use a pair of high end Sennheiser's ( open air of course ). I don't need to overload the volume to get deep bass or midrange. This is crucial when listening to jazz.

In general MP3's suck especially when people try to compress them to cram as many as possible on a CD.

[Bob's your Information Minister]

You'll never catch me with those ****ty earbuds in my ears. For anyone who listens to music seriously, you must have real headphones to maintain the sound and your ears. I use a pair of high end Sennheiser's ( open air of course ). I don't need to overload the volume to get deep bass or midrange. This is crucial when listening to jazz.


Definitely. Have a pair of the 497's myself. Best headphones I ever owned.

[DB-Freak]

My friend and I are huge Marvin Gaye fans.

I have CD's and he has MP3's and when I heard it I didn't find it that different all if different at all.

[Garcia Bronco]

Then you are a hypocrite. Most live music recordings sound like ass compared to a clean studio job.

I have very little live stuff because I think it sounds like ass. That is my OPINION. Just like you have your OPINION.


It would depend on the quailty of the performance...but I'm in no way a hypocrite...there are two main types of live record music...and audience copy or an SBD copy. The SBD copy is basically a studio type of copy..it's mix of the different instruments plugged directly into the board..one way or another. The Audience copy...is recorded these days onto DAT tapes or in some cases Mini-Discs...the raw copies are adjusted for levels and then once they're the best the recorder deems they can be...they then can be seeded via bit-torrent or whatever. Some copies are better than others...but it the actual event regardless...ruining the recording would be to convert to mp3 and circulate it. Recording live shows is a whole other realm that you don't really know to much about...or you wouldn't say stupid **** like that. www.etree.org is a good place to start if you're interest. They also have a bit-torrent page with all types of legally downloaded live concerts of Phish..Dead...DMB..Allmans...and just about any band that allows recording their shows. http://bt.etree.org

[DB-Freak]

It would depend on the quailty of the performance...but I'm in no way a hypocrite...there are two main types of live record music...and audience copy or an SBD copy. The SBD copy is basically a studio type of copy..it's mix of the different instruments plugged directly into the board..one way or another. The Audience copy...is recorded these days onto DAT tapes or in some cases Mini-Discs...the raw copies are adjusted for levels and then once they're the best the recorder deems they can be...they then can be seeded via bit-torrent or whatever. Some copies are better than others...but it the actual event regardless...ruining the recording would be to convert to mp3 and circulate it. Recording live shows is a whole other realm that you don't really know to much about...or you would say stupid **** like that. www.etree.org is a good place to start if you're interest. They also have a bit-torrent page with all types of legally downloaded live concerts of Phish..Dead...DMB..Allmans...and just about any band that allows recording their shows. http://bt.etree.org

Ah so kinda like Jane Says?

The live version was too crisp to be audio taped.

[Garcia Bronco]

Ah so kinda like Jane Says?

The live version was too crisp to be audio taped.


I don't understand..

[DB-Freak]

I don't understand..
Forgot you a dead head.

Anyone ever heard of Jane's addiction?

[Maximus]

Definitely. Have a pair of the 497's myself. Best headphones I ever owned.

That's a great pair and the price is right!!!

I use the PX 100's for my Ipod and Laptop and HD 580's for My NAD System. I will never go cheap after my bout with tinnitis... I will never forget the sleepless nights due to that damn ringing in my ears from blasting music just to get sound!

For the System

http://www.frontiernet.net/~sol.van/HD%20580.jpg

For the Ipod

http://www.frontiernet.net/~sol.van/Sennheiser%20PX%20100.jpg

[broncosteven]

The human ear can't really tell the difference above 128 kbps.

But it is the Harmonics of the Instrument that goes beyond the compression ratio of an MP3 so when you compress a song you are changing the charater of an instrument by in this case cutting out the highs. Just because the layman cannot tell the difference & is happy with the result does not mean that it is "just as good as a CD". I use MP3's to listen to copys of my CD's at work or to burn demo's of my own songs from Cakewalk to CD to listen to in the car quickly or to give to friends.

MP3's Are not "Just as good" as a CD!

Yes Boob You are an IDIOT because you cannot hear this.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

But it is the Harmonics of the Instrument that goes beyond the compression ratio of an MP3 so when you compress a song you are changing the charater of an instrument by in this case cutting out the highs. Just because the layman cannot tell the difference & is happy with the result does not mean that it is "just as good as a CD". I use MP3's to listen to copys of my CD's at work or to burn demo's of my own songs from Cakewalk to CD to listen to in the car quickly or to give to friends.

MP3's Are not "Just as good" as a CD!

Yes Boob You are an IDIOT because you cannot hear this.

Once again, CDs that are ripped and encoded PROPERLY, are indistinguishable form their original CD for 99% of humans.

[Garcia Bronco]

Once again, CDs that are ripped and encoded PROPERLY, are indistinguishable form their original CD for 99% of humans.

They're still damaged copies whether you or 99 percent of human ears can hear it.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

They're still damaged copies whether you or 99 percent of human ears can hear it.

No Garcia, they are imperfect copies that the overwhelming majority of people would never know the difference unless they were told.

[Garcia Bronco]

No Garcia, they are imperfect copies that the overwhelming majority of people would never know the difference unless they were told.


And that's a bad thing. It means that fraud copies of music are being circulated/sold...it's a terrible thing.

[RhymesayersDU]

The human ear can't really tell the difference above 128 kbps.
uh, yes you can. There is a huge difference between 128 and 192.

If I put in the same song on a CD, one in 128 and one in 192, there is a difference when played on a sound system. On my laptop there really isn't, but when you play it in something good, there is a noticeable difference.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

And that's a bad thing. It means that fraud copies of music are being circulated/sold...it's a terrible thing.

ROFL!

No Garcia, this is a "terrible thing"...



















http://www.airbrushshoppe.com/sports/chiefs/images/ken.jpg

[Garcia Bronco]

that is pretty terrible.

[Odysseus]

Why can't fat people keep their clothes on? Geez!!!

[broncosteven]

Once again, CDs that are ripped and encoded PROPERLY, are indistinguishable form their original CD for 99% of humans.


What ever you want to believe. People accept it because it is cool & they think they are getting it cheaper. I prefer to pay a premium to get the highest representation of musical sound. If they would record music at higer sample wavelengths than the current CD books & charge more money for them I would go out & buy it.

Rememer that "Close enough" is only good for Horseshoes & Handgrenades.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What ever you want to believe. People accept it because it is cool & they think they are getting it cheaper. I prefer to pay a premium to get the highest representation of musical sound. If they would record music at higer sample wavelengths than the current CD books & charge more money for them I would go out & buy it.

Rememer that "Close enough" is only good for Horseshoes & Handgrenades.
Getting it cheaper? You misunderstand. I'm talking about ripping music I have and DLing it from a paid subscription.
If you read back through the thread you'll see the links I provided that show the tests on what the human ear can hear and not hear and how using the PROPER ripping and encoding produces music indistinguishable from the original recordings.

[broncosteven]

Getting it cheaper? You misunderstand. I'm talking about ripping music I have and DLing it from a paid subscription.
If you read back through the thread you'll see the links I provided that show the tests on what the human ear can hear and not hear and how using the PROPER ripping and encoding produces music indistinguishable from the original recordings.


I didn't read through all that just where I jumped in - my bad. You would have to sample at the same wavelenghts 44k as the CD to get a true copy & that eats up a lot of disk space on the HD.

I do that on my PCs when I rip to media player & I still get skips on some playbacks so I treat MP3's as tape Cassettes from the 80s & go out & buy CD's for everything.

[Garcia Bronco]

MP3's destroy, damage, and irrevocably modify any type of music. Presentation of Mp3's as quality copies of music is fraud.

[Garcia Bronco]

:)

[Boobs McGee]

If it's so fraudulent, then why aren't sales of MP3's illegal?

[Bob's your Information Minister]

MP3's destroy, damage, and irrevocably modify any type of music. Presentation of Mp3's as quality copies of music is fraud.

Mp3's modify, modify and irrevocably modify any type of music.

Presentation of mp3's as quality copies of music is the opinion of the majority.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

MP3's destroy, damage, and irrevocably modify any type of music. Presentation of Mp3's as quality copies of music is fraud.
Wrong, oh ye of MP3 fraud patrol breath. MP3s do absolutely NOTHING to the original recording, destroying nothing but alas, creating but only another recording where once you had one, you now have 2.

[Garcia Bronco]

If it's so fraudulent, then why aren't sales of MP3's illegal?


I'm saying that based on the way Mp3's work and how they're created...if a service is selling them and claiming they're quality copies..I think you have a case for a law suit.

[Garcia Bronco]

Wrong, oh ye of MP3 fraud patrol breath. MP3s do absolutely NOTHING to the original recording, destroying nothing but alas, creating but only another recording where once you had one, you now have 2.
Except one copy is missing something

[Garcia Bronco]

Mp3's modify, modify and irrevocably modify any type of music.

Presentation of mp3's as quality copies of music is the opinion of the majority.

If you give me a cookie jar that you claim is full and is missing cookies...you're committing fraud.

[Boobs McGee]

So, this is what we've deduced so far.

1. An MP3, no matter which bitrate it's recorded at, is lacking some piece of the original track that's been copied.

2. Thanks to the power of the human ear, the general populous (due to lack of High End stereo equipment, better than average recording skills or people not giving two s**ts) can't tell the difference.

3. If a mime dies and no one see's it, does anyone really care.

4. If we ever need a live recording of the Dead at Barton Hall on May 8th, 1977 when Donna was actually IN TUNE, we know to come to Garcia Bronco.

5. If we ever need a copy of music that has to be as close to the original as possible so that our sensitive little ears cannot discern between the two, then Beerslug is your man for advice.

6. The Broncos will be using some form of the aforementioned music in the warmups at SB XLI

music is good. Live music is the most enthralling and emotional, and studio music is the tempered perfection that musicians strive for.
MP3's are a great way to get as much of the best of both worlds into as small space as possible

[Bob's your Information Minister]

If you give me a cookie jar that you claim is full and is missing cookies...you're committing fraud.

OK that is true.

However, in this case I am stealing the cookies and I don't care if a couple are missing. It makes no difference to me.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Except one copy is missing something

You get a clone of her are you gonna throw her back because she might be missing something you'd never know about?


http://www.cooldudesandhotbabes.com/graphics/babejetski.jpg

[Garcia Bronco]

You get a clone of her are you gonna throw her back because she might be missing something you'd never know about?


http://www.cooldudesandhotbabes.com/graphics/babejetski.jpg

I might listen to her once.

[Ray Finkle]

It boils down to this for me....When I am playing music in my office or the house on a good system, I can notice when some songs are not as clear...that's fine....When I am listening to songs in the gym on my Ipod, I don't care because I would rather have 3K different options that 1 CD....

[Garcia Bronco]

It boils down to this for me....When I am playing music in my office or the house on a good system, I can notice when some songs are not as clear...that's fine....When I am listening to songs in the gym on my Ipod, I don't care because I would rather have 3K different options that 1 CD....


There is nothing wrong with making your collection portable.

[Ray Finkle]

There is nothing wrong with making your collection portable.


I know...to me the option to have all my music at arm's reach is worth a little reduction in clarrity....

Hell, if I could get every song I owned on vinyl, I would be happy but that is not going to happen...

[broncosteven]

OK that is true.

However, in this case I am stealing the cookies and I don't care if a couple are missing. It makes no difference to me.


We have seen your Picture you have eaten all the cookies & then some Boob

[broncosteven]

It boils down to this for me....When I am playing music in my office or the house on a good system, I can notice when some songs are not as clear...that's fine....When I am listening to songs in the gym on my Ipod, I don't care because I would rather have 3K different options that 1 CD....

That is what I was saying, I treat MP3's as I did walkman's in the 80's while diging the Axl Folley Theme. But at home on my brand new CD player I listened to the CD version. Da. da. da da da. da da....

Everything has it's place in the universe (Cheefs at the doormat of the AFC west, Broncos at top - ENCODED media ie dc's DVD at top & MP3s at mid to bot), MP3's are not to replace CD's quality wise, just make it easier to enjoy your music while on the go. As storage media & memory prices come down the paradigm may change. If you can't tell the diff then more power to you enjoy your SOMA.

[Ray Finkle]

That is what I was saying, I treat MP3's as I did walkman's in the 80's while diging the Axl Folley Theme. But at home on my brand new CD player I listened to the CD version. Da. da. da da da. da da....

Everything has it's place in the universe (Cheefs at the doormat of the AFC west, Broncos at top - ENCODED media ie dc's DVD at top & MP3s at mid to bot), MP3's are not to replace CD's quality wise, just make it easier to enjoy your music while on the go. As storage media & memory prices come down the paradigm may change. If you can't tell the diff then more power to you enjoy your SOMA.


Good post.