Audiophile Question - PPT Braintrust
 

Hi, All! I have really a few very basic questions concerning MP3's Vs wav files but no one really seems to know the answer.

I am building a music library on my personal google machine (laptop) with a 750G hard drive. Currently I have @870 songs of all genres in MP3 format stored. I sourced / downloaded all these from the 'ol interweb. The problem is the awful sound quality when piped through a really good sound system. The hissing, the compression is soo bad I can't stand it.

I know part of the problem is where the music is sourced, number of times / formats converted from, etc. Unless the I have the original CD to copy from I also know it is a challenge. I do not own any CD's and purchasing new too cost prohibitive, even used wouldn't work because some artists I like I only want 1-4 of their songs.

I am deciding whether to go try to a different conversion process (to wav files) instead of automatically going to MP3 every time. I know the wav files are not compressed therefor it should sound much better right away.

I also obtain some of my MP3's from Youtube music because the amount and genre are unmatched by any other site. I do not want to get into a discussion about the legality of that, please save that for different thread.

Advice please whether the wav formast is that much more superior. Thanks

There's an old saying, garbage in / garbage out. Similar to, you can't polish a turd.

The format you pick is less relevant than starting with a quality source.

WAV is a CODEC container / wrapper and can contain compressed or uncompressed data.

If you are looking for uncompressed then LPCM will likely be the encoding you use.

It'll use ~10x's the disc space of a typical mp3

"Hiss" is generally not a problem with MP3. What sample rate are they? Are you using a quality DAC or just the onboard sound card for analog conversion? WAV is the pro standard format but a high sample rate MP3 (320K) through a quality DAC can sound quite excellent. Certainly no format-induced hiss.

I'm using freeware conversion from MP4 to MP3. Reviewing the rate some are only 128..........

This is probably 90% of the problem. Conversion from mixed compressed formats into small sample rate files sound like poo. Start with quality audio files and run them through an outboard DAC for amazing music. For comparison, purchase a few high sample rate MP3s or WAV files and give em a listen. Trust your ears to see if the difference makes sense to you.

Yeah, you are done. Mp3 is generally unlistenable especially at lower rates.

Closest I have been able to deal with is apple lossless at the highest settings- m4a. For you that would also mean using itunes. Unless you copy straight from CD or a high quality source you are done.

For real listening I still use CD's and have a CD changer in the car.

A true audiophile will avoid any compressed formats (MPx) verses a raw data file (WAV) or a lossless compression technique (FLAC, SHN, etc.) as the source for their music. This is a discussion that could last hours....YMMV.

ps: Not knocking MP3s per se. Convenience sometimes wins out over "perfection" otherwise we would be talking about "digital" verses analog....I don't do MP3s however :)

An accurate assessment. A true audiophile will spare no expense to achieve uncompromised music reproduction. MP3 does not meet these standards. A true audiophile would probably not even consider a 16/44.1 CD to be HiFi and prefer to listen to 24/96 lossless files through a high end DAC. Different strokes for different folks.

To me, music files are simply tools of the trade and each has it's uses. Sometimes the finest quality is not necessary to me when a simper tool will get it done. I do find multi-format compressed file conversions to be pretty unlistenable though.

So assuming I first fix my sources for music and go for some of the higher end web sites that offer master quality (or close to). Do I use a DAV converter between my laptop 3.5mm output and my home amplifier?

Most laptops have miserable onboard sound cards so an aftermarket USB DAC is almost always needed for quality sound.

This one is excellent and forum member Ian reps the company:
Cambridge Audio DacMagic 100 (Black) Stereo digital-to-analog converter with asynchronous USB input at Crutchfield.com

I found one of these to be 10x better than most onboard sound cards at an attractive price:
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: HiFiMeDIY Sabre USB DAC Digital to Analog Audio Converter 96khz/24bit ES9023+TE7022 + USB to Optical Converter

Either one of these will transform your listening experience once you have quality music files on your hard drive.

So it looks as if I have mulitple areas to address here. I have a Sony Blue-ray DVD player. Is it possible to run my sound through that to use the DAV capability?

That depends on the quality of it's onboard DAC. Probably measurably better than the laptop but not comparable to a dedicated audio DAC. Try it and trust your ears.

Ok - So first thing to pop for a DAC to address that, then onto researching inline sources for quality files.

There is nothing you can do to improve files that are simply at too low of a bit rate. The data just isn't there. When I manually rip songs from CDs, I generally select 256k stereo, and it sounds ok through a sound system. I think Apples ACC format using variable bit rate does a pretty good job. Some of my files are only 190k, and they sound good. Depends on the content of the song.

Keep in mind that depending on what you are listening to, many of the source recordings are not all that great. I was recently listening to Journey, and I was surprised at how bad the mastering was on some of their original recordings. Same thing for Smashing Pumpkins.

Good advice here. I would re-source the music you want in FLAC format-even high bitrate mp3 is lossy, but in many cases passable...then use a free player such as media monkey or foobar, running the output via USB to a USB spdif/dac (either a combo piece from ebay or seperates-I use an M2 Hiface usb spdif interface and an outboard dac). I do this on a high end system with good to stunning results. The high def stuff (24/96) from HD tracks is amazing, but even standard 16bit cds sound good when ripped lossless.

I have no moral compunction about torrenting flac copies of stuff I've already purchased either in CD or another format, but feel differently about just stealing music. There is some amazing live stuff for free at etree, dimeadozen, and live music archive - and some of it is killer hi fi as well, using very high end mics and almost all is in lossless format.

When I record live or in the studio I use wav or aiff, but for general listening I will bounce to 256K mp3. It sounds "good enough" for all but the most critical listening situations. The Apple AAC at 128K is about equivalent (maybe better - depends who you talk to) but I know anyone will be able to deal with mp3 and I'm usually making live tracks available for download on the web.

I'll disagree slightly:

There is not a lot you can do to improve files that are simply at too low of a bit rate. The data that just isn't there can be interpolated using various algorithms, but don't expect the same quality in all conditions. You may or may not be able to hear the difference.

So, yes obtain new higher bit rate files of the music if you can.

Run digital out of the laptop and keep away from the sound card in the computer. Use an outboard D>A converter to feed you $10,000 system.

Ian has posted before in OT re some good D>A units - maybe only $300 or so.

That says it all.

Ian

Ok - just purchased the DAC above from amazon, downloaded Media Monkey (free version) which BTW is the most highly reviewed of any player/file organizer.

Does anyone know if Amazon's MP3's are all highly coded? How to identify the bit rate if using MPx before purchasing?

Thanks all

avoid .mp-anything is the easiest way, tho as per my above comment you may or may not be able to hear the difference depending on source material

99%+ of my music is ripped from CDs I own...

Same here.

Its seems odd, but CDs are actually a great deal....if you buy them used. If you have a college nearby, I'm sure there is a shop that sells used CDs. The fact is, as long its not scratched, a 20 year old Miles Davis CD sounds just as good as a new one, and its 1/4 the price.

I also still buy new CDs.

Changing computers, devices, sharing music with friends......the ability of download is great, and I do it once in awhile. But having the source files always seems to work out to be a better option. Just my humble opinion.

Source files are great, but I simply refuse to buy music I already own or owned. For example, I lsot 500+ cd's in a divorce-I'm not buying all of that again, thank you very much.

Also, much of the remastered stuff is a step above-listen to the remaster Aja vs one release in 1990 or so to get the idea.

But yeah, I would take any used cd over an Amazon download; what's frustrating to me is the artists that release on itunes in mp3 without a lossless format available, which I would pay for. I really don't want the silver disc, I just want forever access to the data-there;s a biz model for someone-unlimited flac streaming from a cloud server, pay by the album or on a netflix like subscription. Damn, just gave my retirement stream away again :)

"Amazon MP3 was the first music download company to sign deals with all four major music labels. They were also the first to encode tracks at 256 kbps, a trend that was quickly followed by its competitors, including the top two music download services, iTunes and Napster."
http://music-download-review.toptenreviews.com/amazon-mp3-review.html

Most of my digital music was ripped from my CD collection but I have downloaded quite a bit of music from Amazon at MP3 256K and I am very satisfied with the result. Will it meet the needs of a no compromise audiophile? No. Only 24/96 raw files will serve them and even a CD at 16/44.1 is considered weak sauce. I am a simple musician and was not blessed with such golden ears. Download a few tracks and see if you agree. Jeff Beck live at Ronnie Scott's was recorded pretty well and the 256k MP3 does it justice I think.

Thanks for the great input all! - I don't think I have 'master audiophile ears' but I can recognize p*ss poor quality when i hear it. Just trying to narrow down choices and direction when rebuilding my poor quality library.

Problem is there is some really good performances on Youtube but doesn't seem like available anywhere else

golden ears means you need a lot of gold - it is a curse

Find your way into a quality room with vinyl and a tube amp and listen to great music at reasonable volume levels. This will put things in an entirely different perspective- if you have the ears for it you will never sit around listening to 'delivery of data' hardware again...

BTDT....disagree for many reasons :D

BTW -- just saw the banner ad here for HD Tracks!! Cowinkie Dink? Don't think so.......