The 49 Year Old Virgin!

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

I can rarely detect any differences in a double blind test between a flac and an MP3 encoded with a decent encoder at 192kbps or above. But only you know the value of 20GBP to you.

Download the ABX component for foobar2000 and test for yourself by making some MP3 files at different bitrates from a few favorite flac files. Many people are surprised at how low one must go with MP3 bitrate before one can detect a difference from lossless.

Gary,

Ha ha, well I took this one a few minutes ago (just for laughs). I thought I had fairly good ears, but I got it wrong! However, the margin between those who get it correct and those who don't is surprising narrow (as is revealed after the test).

http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/...-test-128-320/

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Gary,

With Amazon, it's a case of: you get what you are given. Which I am assuming is a 'H.Q. MP3' (320kbps)?

You said earlier to NOT convert - via Illustrate - to FLAC (once purchased/downloaded). I think you just meant from the point-of-view of SIZE. But if I wanted to maintain consistency with all of my music files (and I was prepared to sacrifice some 'space'), then would it be OK to convert the purchased MP3s to FLAC, please? I mean, would it cause any harm/destruction?

Thanks,

Paul

[garym]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Gary,

With Amazon, it's a case of: you get what you are given. Which I am assuming is a 'H.Q. MP3' (320kbps)?

You said earlier to NOT convert - via Illustrate - to FLAC (once purchased/downloaded). I think you just meant from the point-of-view of SIZE. But if I wanted to maintain consistency with all of my music files (and I was prepared to sacrifice some 'space'), then would it be OK to convert the purchased MP3s to FLAC, please? I mean, would it cause any harm/destruction?

Thanks,

Paul

it wont hurt anything. Just sort of silly to do. If you do convert to FLAC be sure to add a comment tag to note that the original is mp3. You may want to know this in the future.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

it wont hurt anything. Just sort of silly to do. If you do convert to FLAC be sure to add a comment tag to note that the original is mp3. You may want to know this in the future.

OK, thanks Gary.

I will have a think over the next few days and then get back to you ...

Cheers.

[Jailhouse]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

The majority of the two dozen or so MP3 tracks I've downloaded from Amazon are 256kbps, constant or variable rate. One is 210kbps variable, one is 290kbps variable. None are over 300kbps.

If you see a file with an MP3 icon, or "MP3" in a codec list, you immediately know its inherent quality. You don't have to check tags.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

The majority of the two dozen or so MP3 tracks I've downloaded from Amazon are 256kbps, constant or variable rate. One is 210kbps variable, one is 290kbps variable. None are over 300kbps.

If you see a file with an MP3 icon, or "MP3" in a codec list, you immediately know its inherent quality. You don't have to check tags.

Thanks JH,

As I say, this is the first time I ever looked into this. I doubt I will d/l as many as you have from Amazon!

And so are the Amazon MP3s NOT of 'High Quality'? Can you live with the kbps bit-rate offered?

Can you tell the tell the quality of an Amazon MP3 BEFORE you actually purchase it, please?:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Complete-Co...orner+complete

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

As I say, this is the first time I ever looked into this. I doubt I will d/l as many as you have from Amazon!

A few were free samplers that I tried for fun, and got a couple of keepers. Most of the rest are songs I could not find on CD at the time. When I get CDs that have those songs, the MP3s go away. There are a couple or three that I bought because I'm sure I don't want the albums they're on, and I don't need CD quality in those cases anyway.

And so are the Amazon MP3s NOT of 'High Quality'? Can you livewith the kbps bit-rate offered?

256kbps is pretty good; the quality is okay if one doesn't do really critical listening. I can live with it, mainly because I deal with what I have, and possibly because my hearing isn't what it used to be. Also, it beats by miles the AM radios I used to listen to.

I just got the CD that one of my Amazon MP3s is from. I'll listen to both versions to see if I can hear any differences. See below for the dBpoweramp tab of the Properties dialog.

Can you tell the tell the quality of an Amazon MP3 BEFORE you actually purchase it, please?

I don't see anything on Amazon that indicates the resolution of their files. You can reasonably assume that what you get from them will be around 256kbps. Lower numbers look to be for songs with variable-rate encoding that don't need the full 256kbps to get the desired output, i.e., quiet stuff.

[evasv]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Do all d/l music retailers make their MP3s 'High Quality'? I am guessing that this means they are (encoded) at: 320kb per sec.?; which I do believe is the highest bit-rate possible for MP3 fomat?

And so are the Amazon MP3s NOT of 'High Quality'? Can you live with the kbps bit-rate offered?

I think you shouldn't worry too much about bitrate; the Amazon downloads are probably fine in that regard. Pay more attention to sources and remasters, if that info is available, as they matter more.

320kbps downloads had their purpose 10 years ago when many encoders were crap, but even in those days 192 kbps was fine with a quality encoder like LAME. I sometimes find Spotify 320 kbps to sound bad, but I suspect that has to do with the source or the mastering.

I rarely download mp3, but I'm almost certain that online stores use quality encoders nowadays, otherwise they should be ashamed.

Good mp3's are hard to distinguish from flac and will probably satisfy you soundwise, but if you want perfection, go for flac. I can see your dilemma here, since it's an outtake album after all.

Gapless playing of live albums can be more problematic with mp3 than with flac, but this also depends on your player.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1885[/ATTACH]

Hi JH,

I have reported your attach. not showing again.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

I think you shouldn't worry too much about bitrate; the Amazon downloads are probably fine in that regard. Pay more attention to sources and remasters, if that info is available, as they matter more.

320kbps downloads had their purpose 10 years ago when many encoders were crap, but even in those days 192 kbps was fine with a quality encoder like LAME. I sometimes find Spotify 320 kbps to sound bad, but I suspect that has to do with the source or the mastering.

I rarely download mp3, but I'm almost certain that online stores use quality encoders nowadays, otherwise they should be ashamed.

Good mp3's are hard to distinguish from flac and will probably satisfy you soundwise, but if you want perfection, go for flac. I can see your dilemma here, since it's an outtake album after all.

Gapless playing of live albums can be more problematic with mp3 than with flac, but this also depends on your player.

Hi Evasv,

I have not encountered 'gapless' playing yet (as far as I am aware). I have heard it mentioned though on the 'Audacity' forum.

I have never used Spotify/Deezer etc before. Guess I am in the minority yet again!

I appreciate your info. I had a good think this week. Because I am probably only going to buy this Miles Davis boxset as a complete one-off, and because it is Xmas coming up, I think I will buy the FLAC d/l format from 'quobuz' (@ 46 Euros):

http://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/the.../0886970623926

It is an album I have really wanted for about 8 x years and 46 Euros is better than paying 200GBP! As I say, it would be a one-off. I did try making 'offers' on eBay for a few weeks but they all got 'declined'; which is stupid really because they will never sell at such ridiculous prices. They are simply not worth it!

Cheers,

Paul

[mville]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

I have not encountered 'gapless' playing yet (as far as I am aware). I have heard it mentioned though on the 'Audacity' forum.

Gapless playback allows for the seamless playback of your audio tracks. This is especially important for live albums and the odd concept album (e.g. Pink Floyd - TDSOTM), so tracks play without an audible gap between each track.

I'm not entirely sure why evasv states:
Gapless playing of live albums can be more problematic with mp3 than with flac though.

foobar2000 is a gapless player.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Gapless playback allows for the seamless playback of your audio tracks. This is especially important for live albums and the odd concept album (e.g. Pink Floyd - TDSOTM), so tracks play without an audible gap between each track.

I'm not entirely sure why evasv states:
Gapless playing of live albums can be more problematic with mp3 than with flac though.

foobar2000 is a gapless player.

mville,

OK, thanks a lot. I see what you mean now. So sometimes when one track fades into another, you may get a couple of seconds break (silence) - which disrupts the flow.

In any event, do I need to set anything within 'dBpa' to combat this issue? At least foobar adheres to 'gapless'!

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

In any event, do I need to set anything within 'dBpa' to combat this issue?
Paul

no. Your rips to FLAC are automatically gapless.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

no. Your rips to FLAC are automatically gapless.

Hi Gary,

Oh great, that's ingenious!

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

http://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/the.../0886970623926

You have the possibily to buy it in CD Quality 16/44 on Qobuz, HDtracks, Acoustic Sounds ... also
It is better than MP3 but more expensive of course

Hi Thg6276,

I have contacted 'qobuz' Customer Services about opening an account and purchasing.

Cheers,

Paul