If you makes a mp3 into AAC, will the sound quality drop?
MAX
Yes, the sound quality will drop. At best it would about the same, but it's likely that additional music information is going to get lost in the conversion process resulting in a slightly reduced quality of the converted track.
When fighting the sounds of a normal commute while using the iPod default ear buds, 128 AAC is good, 160 AAC is perfect. Anything better is washed out by the sounds of the train.
Fighting the sound of normal commute is actually better solved by 1) getting an closed-ear phone since the physical noise isolation by cupping your ear is more effective than anything else or 2) compress the dynamic range of your music.
Case in point: in classical or jazz music, there is often a large range between the softest and the loudest passage. As a result, one is often forced to turn up the volume during the quiet passages and turn down the volume during the loud passages. By dynamically compressing the range, the difference becomes smaller and one would not have to manually adjust the volume (this is often found in home theater receivers as the 'night mode'). Of course, one loses the true fidelity of the source material.
Now, if the music you listen to is highly produced/synthetic, say Britney, this would not matter since the dynamic range is already compressed.
Lastly, since there is no way to compress the dynamic range in either iTunes or iPod, this would make it a moot case.
Will I notice a difference between mp3 and AIFF? and will the Ipod receieve/playback AIFF
Thanks
Jools
Best way is try it yourself. You may find that low bit-rate is the best for you/equipment/music source.
Another example: when I listen to music at home, I usually play it on a Sony ES receiver with Magnepan speakers. Not a $$$ setup but probably better than most people out there.
When I play music on the iBook, I encoded it at 192 kbps MP3 (at least until AAC was introduced). Not as good as the one before but good enough.
When on the go, I used my PocketPC as music source (256 MB SD + 256 MB CF card) and a noise-reduction headphone. Since the NC headphone's cut off is at 15 khz, I encode my music (mostly classical and opera) at "Good Quality 1x VBR" with the WMAv9 codec which results in an average bitrate of 70 kbps (1 minute = 0.6 MB). Guess what? It still sounds good!
So try it out, find someone to help you with a 2x blind test and find the best codec/bitrate combination for yourself, not that of another person.
I rip all of my music in 320. I also have some sermons that I listen to in 32k, but that is talking. (Encoded from 16k in realaudio) Anything I download off the net, I prefer to be at least 192, but take 128. So, the vast majority of my library is 320...
Comments
Originally posted by Cube
AAC 128 All the way here!!!
If you makes a mp3 into AAC, will the sound quality drop?
MAX
Yes, the sound quality will drop. At best it would about the same, but it's likely that additional music information is going to get lost in the conversion process resulting in a slightly reduced quality of the converted track.
Wy can you only ripp in 128 AAC in itunes 4?!?!
MAX
Is AAC more cpu intensive then MP3 ore is it the same?
MAX
Originally posted by Cube
Wy can you only ripp in 128 AAC in itunes 4?!?!
I can rip at a great number of AAC bitrates, just select the 'custom' option.
And from what I've heard decoding AAC is less CPU intensive than decoding MP3s.
Thx fore the help
MAX
Sheesh and I can't even tell the difference between 128Kbps Mp3 and the original, oh well.
Originally posted by bunge
When fighting the sounds of a normal commute while using the iPod default ear buds, 128 AAC is good, 160 AAC is perfect. Anything better is washed out by the sounds of the train.
Fighting the sound of normal commute is actually better solved by 1) getting an closed-ear phone since the physical noise isolation by cupping your ear is more effective than anything else or 2) compress the dynamic range of your music.
Case in point: in classical or jazz music, there is often a large range between the softest and the loudest passage. As a result, one is often forced to turn up the volume during the quiet passages and turn down the volume during the loud passages. By dynamically compressing the range, the difference becomes smaller and one would not have to manually adjust the volume (this is often found in home theater receivers as the 'night mode'). Of course, one loses the true fidelity of the source material.
Now, if the music you listen to is highly produced/synthetic, say Britney, this would not matter since the dynamic range is already compressed.
Lastly, since there is no way to compress the dynamic range in either iTunes or iPod, this would make it a moot case.
Summary: Get a bigger headphone.
Originally posted by kittylitterdesign
Will I notice a difference between mp3 and AIFF? and will the Ipod receieve/playback AIFF
Thanks
Jools
Best way is try it yourself. You may find that low bit-rate is the best for you/equipment/music source.
Another example: when I listen to music at home, I usually play it on a Sony ES receiver with Magnepan speakers. Not a $$$ setup but probably better than most people out there.
When I play music on the iBook, I encoded it at 192 kbps MP3 (at least until AAC was introduced). Not as good as the one before but good enough.
When on the go, I used my PocketPC as music source (256 MB SD + 256 MB CF card) and a noise-reduction headphone. Since the NC headphone's cut off is at 15 khz, I encode my music (mostly classical and opera) at "Good Quality 1x VBR" with the WMAv9 codec which results in an average bitrate of 70 kbps (1 minute = 0.6 MB). Guess what? It still sounds good!
So try it out, find someone to help you with a 2x blind test and find the best codec/bitrate combination for yourself, not that of another person.