The 49 Year Old Virgin!

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi folks,

I am not ashamed to admit it!; I have never purchase a d/l track/album before! The reason being is that I have always much preferred to own a physical hard-copy CD (of which comes alongside a much welcomed liner notes insert).

But now (after many years of being stubborn) I have seen a Miles Davis 6 x CD boxset which I would really like; however, I refuse to pay the ridiculous asking prices of circa £300!:

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

Because I now subscribe to 'Amazon Prime', I have become to notice certain features. While I definitely would not consider subscribing to 'streaming', I have finally accepted that I am prepared to pay £20 for the: 'Complete Miles On The Corner' boxset (it has taken me 3 months to break out of my mould!).

I have not actually purchased the album yet as I have a question to ask. This may sound a bit silly but I really wanted to check, please:

If I buy the album then I assume Amazon sent me a LINK so that I can d/l it. It says: 'Buy MP3 Album' and so obviously the album is an MP3! But once you d/l it, will everything be pre-track-marked so that the 6 x CDs worth of music play from top to bottom in the correct order? Or will they come out in alphabetical order instead?

Secondly, do I just leave them in MP3 format, or do/can I convert them to FLAC using 'dBpa'? I d/l an ultra rare Chick Corea using a You-Tube grabber last month and Gary (I think it was) said for me to rip it to FLAC so that it is consistent with the remainder of my ripped CD collection. I did look to see if it is possible to purchase this album directly in FLAC, but the results looked to be quite suspicious!:

https://en.usenet.nl/registration/?utm_source=AF_TA_102621&utm_medium=AFSI&utm_campaign=437856&utm_content=0_1

Many thanks in advance for any kind assistance offered here.

Paul

[garym]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Do not convert downloaded MP3 to flac. Waste of space

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Do not convert downloaded MP3 to flac. Waste of space

Nice one; cheers Gary.

[Thg6276]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

http://www.qobuz.com/fr-fr/album/the-complete-on-the-corner-sessions-miles-davis/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

[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

That's great Thg6276

I will check those out mate.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

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 just took a look, thanks.

It seems Amazon only offer MP3 d/l. In short, an MP3 d/l on Amazon costs circa half the price of a FLAC d/l (of the same album) elsewhere (eg. Acoustic Sounds).

Would you ever consider purchasing albums which are offered at (say): FLAC 192kHz/24bit? Or do you just stick to the 44.1kHz/16bit format?

Paul

[schmidj]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Paul,

From a different user but with a long background in audio. There is no reason to increase the sample rate above 44.1 (or 48 if the source is video)kHz, unless you have the ears of a dog, you'll never hear a confirmable difference. In fact FM radio is the equivalent of a 32kHz sample rate (and does other nasties, like the preemphasis of high frequencies (to reduce hiss) and the resultant necessity to apply limiting to the higher frequencies. There might possibly be in some cases some advantage of 44.1/24 over 44.1/16 if (and this is a big if) the original source material wasn't already 44.1/16.

I'm perfectly happy with 44.1/16, but I'm not the golden ear type. I have heard mp3's and m4a's of moderate bandwidth where I could easily hear a difference to FLAC files, in a few cases. Many others of the same compression, no audible difference. And in my car, where I listen to 128K or so m4a's the only tracks I have an issue with are the ones which were badly ripped (almost all of which were ripped before I found dBpoweramp...)

I don't buy many downloads, I much prefer to have the physical product. But in the few cases where I have, I try to get FLACs or .WAV's at 44.1/16 (or 24 if it comes that way.) I do have a few mp3's and without anything to compare them to, they sound fine.

BTW, if these are from analog masters, in all likelihood, anything outside the range of 44.1/16 is probably noise or distortion products. In fact any audible difference between the FLAC/.WAV copy and a reasonable bandwidth mp3 or m4a is probably also noise or distortion products.

Just my opinion, others may disagree.

John

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

From a different user but with a long background in audio. There is no reason to increase the sample rate above 44.1 (or 48 if the source is video)kHz, unless you have the ears of a dog, you'll never hear a confirmable difference. In fact FM radio is the equivalent of a 32kHz sample rate (and does other nasties, like the preemphasis of high frequencies (to reduce hiss) and the resultant necessity to apply limiting to the higher frequencies. There might possibly be in some cases some advantage of 44.1/24 over 44.1/16 if (and this is a big if) the original source material wasn't already 44.1/16.

I'm perfectly happy with 44.1/16, but I'm not the golden ear type. I have heard mp3's and m4a's of moderate bandwidth where I could easily hear a difference to FLAC files, in a few cases. Many others of the same compression, no audible difference. And in my car, where I listen to 128K or so m4a's the only tracks I have an issue with are the ones which were badly ripped (almost all of which were ripped before I found dBpoweramp...)

I don't buy many downloads, I much prefer to have the physical product. But in the few cases where I have, I try to get FLACs or .WAV's at 44.1/16 (or 24 if it comes that way.) I do have a few mp3's and without anything to compare them to, they sound fine.

BTW, if these are from analog masters, in all likelihood, anything outside the range of 44.1/16 is probably noise or distortion products. In fact any audible difference between the FLAC/.WAV copy and a reasonable bandwidth mp3 or m4a is probably also noise or distortion products.

Many thanks John,

Well my situation is this:

With boxsets containing unissued material (eg. 'The Complete Miles Davis On The Corner') I am not at all bothered about these being in 92kHz/24bit (or similar). The quality of the 'unissued' tracks is, typically, inferior to that of the 'released' ones. For example, the former are rarely mixed very well and the performances (by the musicians) are often inadequate (which is, of course, why there are deemed as 'rejected takes'!). But, as an avid Jazz fan, I do like to hear the 'out-takes' just for the sake of being able to appreciate how the 'master-takes' evolved (in other words, I am interested in the actual 'compositional' process). Record companies must love people (mugs!) like me - $$$!

And so, in the case of: 'The Complete Miles Davis On The Corner' boxset, I would have thought that either the MP3 d/l from Amazon (@ 19.99GBP) would be fine; or else the FLAC d/l from Quobuz (@ 46.99GBP). Regarding the former, I am not sure if the quality would be the same as if - using 'dBpa' - I ripped the audio (from a hard-copy CD) to FLAC?; or if the quality would be lesser? Or, how the Amazon d/l format might compare to the Quobuz (considering the 50% price difference). As I say, I have never purchased a d/l album before! - hence this thread.

Of course, ideally, I would much rather own the hard-copy of the boxset - but I refuse to pay over 250GBP! I can not even envisage someone spending that sort of amount?; though I have recently come to learn that an audiofool knows no boundaries!

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Hi John,

I meant to add:

I listen to my music with a pair Sennheiser connected to my Amazon tablet, and using 'VLC Player'.

I also listen via my PC which has an external soundcard (made by Steinberg), with flat-response headphones (Beyer-Dynamic); and, again, using 'VLC Player'.

My third method is to listen via my PC (attached to the external soundcard [made by Steinberg]), through flat-response mains-speakers (Yamaha HS7); and, as always, using 'VLC Player'.

I never listen to music in the car, period. And I do not listen to music as quietly in-the-background, or as loud party/entertainment (unless of course I am attending a social event and therefore have no control over such preferences).

Since August last, all music file formats have been FLAC exclusively.

Thanks,

Paul

[mville]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

I listen to my music with a pair Sennheiser connected to my Amazon tablet, and using 'VLC Player'.

I also listen via my PC which has an external soundcard (made by Steinberg), with flat-response headphones (Beyer-Dynamic); and, again, using 'VLC Player'.

My third method is to listen via my PC (attached to the external soundcard [made by Steinberg]), through flat-response mains-speakers (Yamaha HS7); and, as always, using 'VLC Player'.

What happened to foobar2000?

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

What happened to foobar2000?

mville,

I stand corrected! I am not sure how I made that typo!?

On my Amazon Tablet is 'VLC'; and on my PC is Foobar.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

With boxsets containing unissued material (eg. 'The Complete Miles Davis On The Corner') I am not at all bothered about these being in 92kHz/24bit (or similar). The quality of the 'unissued' tracks is, typically, inferior to that of the 'released' ones. For example, the former are rarely mixed very well and the performances (by the musicians) are often inadequate (which is, of course, why there are deemed as 'rejected takes'!). But, as an avid Jazz fan, I do like to hear the 'out-takes' just for the sake of being able to appreciate how the 'master-takes' evolved (in other words, I am interested in the actual 'compositional' process). Record companies must love people (mugs!) like me - $$$!

And so, in the case of: 'The Complete Miles Davis On The Corner' boxset, I would have thought that either the MP3 d/l from Amazon (@ 19.99GBP) would be fine; or else the FLAC d/l from Quobuz (@ 46.99GBP). Regarding the former, I am not sure if the quality would be the same as if - using 'dBpa' - I ripped the audio (from a hard-copy CD) to FLAC?; or if the quality would be lesser? Or, how the Amazon d/l format might compare to the Quobuz (considering the 50% price difference). As I say, I have never purchased a d/l album before! - hence this thread.

Of course, ideally, I would much rather own the hard-copy of the boxset - but I refuse to pay over 250GBP! I can not even envisage someone spending that sort of amount?; though I have recently come to learn that an audiofool knows no boundaries!

Hi guys,

I am still hoping to receive some assistance, please , with the above question; hence I am bumping this.

I hope this is permissible; but if not, then Moderator(s) please feel free to remove this very post.

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Hi guys,

I am still hoping to receive some assistance, please , with the above question; hence I am bumping this.

I hope this is permissible; but if not, then Moderator(s) please feel free to remove this very post.

Cheers,

Paul

Flac download is same as ripping to flac from CD. High quality MP3 download from amazon is likely just fine. The MP3 probably better than your YouTube downloads.

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Flac download is same as ripping to flac from CD. High quality MP3 download from amazon is likely just fine. The MP3 probably better than your YouTube downloads.

Hi Gary,

OK, so if I want the same audio quality as my self-made-FLAC-rips then I need to pay the 40GBP for the FLAC 16-bit/44.1kHz format. But if I can make do with MP3 quality then I can buy the 20GBP files from Amazon.

Yes, the You-Tube d/l are a bit hit and miss. But they are sufficient in that I only plan to d/l no more than 10; and I refuse to pay 200GBP for a CD!

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?

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Re: The 49 Year Old Virgin!

Hi Gary,

OK, so if I want the same audio quality as my self-made-FLAC-rips then I need to pay the 40GBP for the FLAC 16-bit/44.1kHz format. But if I can make do with MP3 quality then I can buy the 20GBP files from Amazon.

Yes, the You-Tube d/l are a bit hit and miss. But they are sufficient in that I only plan to d/l no more than 10; and I refuse to pay 200GBP for a CD!

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?

Cheers,

Paul

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.