bjorn_skurj Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I spent $9 on changing a mess of songs from the old to the plus format and $9.99 on Pink Floyd's Animals. The larger files sound pretty damned good. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 haven't heard of this how large are the larger files? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted May 31, 2007 Author Share Posted May 31, 2007 haven't heard of this how large are the larger files?They are at 256kbps, so I would imagine they are twice as big as the 128kbps ones, I would figure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 oh good now maybe oink will allow itunes tracks now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I would guess if they keep the DRM on it they won't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 yeah that's true. I just always heard the main argument is that they were 128. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Well, you wouldn't be able to play the file with the DRM on it, would you? You'd have to burn it to a cd and then re-rip it, thus lowering the quality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Well, you wouldn't be able to play the file with the DRM on it, would you? You'd have to burn it to a cd and then re-rip it, thus lowering the quality. I know you can take those off some how w/o re-ripping em. My friend has a program that does it. Have to ask him about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 Hydrogen Audio article on the new DRM free deal not a fan of Mp3 - as you may know if I have no choice or I am ripping a commercial cd for some reason then - Lame 3.97 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TCP Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 "Analogman" doesn't like mp3s? What?!?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chendizzle Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 I would guess if they keep the DRM on it they won't. Itunes Plus is DRM free, however: With great power comes great responsibility' date=' and apparently with DRM-free music comes files embedded with identifying information. Such is the situation with Apple's new DRM-free music: songs sold without DRM still have a user's full name and account e-mail embedded in them, which means that dropping that new DRM-free song on your favorite P2P network could come back to bite you.[/quote'] Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted June 1, 2007 Author Share Posted June 1, 2007 Itunes Plus is DRM free, however:Oooo, that's dirty. Thanks for posting that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 isn't 256 overkill? I always thought the 192 aac was good enough Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vacant Horizon Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 i have tried several times to discern lossy vs. lossless. usually with very frustrating results. itunes songs that i have bought sound pretty good. it wasn't till i was aware of bit rates that i started to worry about it. so i did research and settled on 192 aac. lately i have been worried about not having an ipod forever, so have been using 192 mp3. i guess 256 is overkill in some cases, especially new music from mid 90s to now. all of that seems to have the same loudness to me. now, i have tried to put older stuff from the 70s in a less lossy or lossless format on my ipod and i just cant hear the difference. volume is still really low, i still have to adjust it. these different levels of loudness are pretty frustrating on shuffle. i know its not just about loudness, but clarity etc. i do think it is the source that determins all this stuff. YHF sounds great, to my ears, even at 160, where as Tonight's the Night still sounds like a 70s record at 320 or lossless. oh well, ranting. more power to the audiofiles here. feedback? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
street spirit Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 the loudness issue has nothing to do with the bitrate... that all depends on the source. as for whether you can tell the difference or not, that comes down to personal preference. although, it's doubtful that anyone could blindly tell the difference between 320kbps (which i find a bit overkill usually) and lossless. i like ripping with LAME at V2/APS. the file size is pretty manageable, and i can't discern any difference in sound, esp on my ipod. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
willywoody Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 i use ivolume for my mac to better equalize volume levels of different cds. it has worked well. i use 256 aac for encoding and its pretty near flawless with acceptable file sizes. 192 aac or vbr lame encoded mp3 is going to be near perfect, too. it really matters on what music you listen to and how you listen to it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 Try making a mix with a couple of 126, a couple of 192, and a couple of 256 songs. You'll be able to notice the difference immediately, if not sooner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted June 1, 2007 Author Share Posted June 1, 2007 isn't 256 overkill? I always thought the 192 aac was good enoughI agree, but they do sound sweet on the iPod. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.