Should I spend for serious ICE ?

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

A CD typically has a hell of a lot of dynamic range. However most current CDs are mastered so poorly that we see pretty bad compression artifacts and clipping in rare cases. Such poorly mastered CDs will sound pretty sad. This is especially true for all popular types of music. The current trend unfortunately is that louder the cd, the more sales it'll have. What this basically means is that we get super loud CDs with zilch dynamic range which become irritating to listen to after a while. Thats the unfortunate truth about current popular music and more than anyone, the music companies are to blame for following this trend.

totally agree....I have few imported CDs which have lesser output when compared to the Indian one which are total rubbish.....

[mithun]

Originally Posted by speedonline

Guys a question related to the media, does the write speed affect the quality of the recording ???

I know that the older(the very old) Audio CD players needed the CD's to be burned at lower speeds. But, I have never heard that advice in the case of MP3 and MP3's will work perfectly irrespective of the write speeds. But, it's advisable to write at lower speeds to reduce the probability of write errors.

[vivekiny2k]

the white paper posted earlier in this thread sheds some light on the write speed too.

http://www.genesisloudspeakers.com/w...0ver%203.1.pdf

by the way, amazing discussion folks. a new learning every day on TBHP.

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by mithun

I know that the older(the very old) Audio CD players needed the CD's to be burned at lower speeds. But, I have never heard that advice in the case of MP3 and MP3's will work perfectly irrespective of the write speeds. But, it's advisable to write at lower speeds to reduce the probability of write errors.

It is always better to write at low speed as the compatibility issue is resolve....

[navin]

another discussion here.
diyAudio Forums - Why does CD sound better copied?

[Sam Kapasi]

Not only does the material and dye matter, but the basic construction of the CD, ensures longevity.
Being one of the first users of the CD-R format (When blanks cost Rs.250/- each and 2X recorders cost 22000/-, lol) I must point out the the quality of the earliest HP, TDK and Sony blanks was outstanding. Unfortunately, with the advent of cheap CD's the quality has become crap.
You may not find the difference now, but 3 or 4 years down the line, you may find your data unreadable, CD's with degraded or corroded data areas. Be careful.
I find CD's with a complete vinyl coat on the top side to have increased longevity (basically the fully printed CDs, not the ones that have a metallic shine on both sides)

From past experience I find blank CDs from TDK, Verbatim, Maxell, Fuji etc. to be top class.
Also I am a big fan of Moser Baer (Called BASF when I was younger) products.

Cheap CD-Rs like Eurovision, Sohaanaa I use mostly for data sharing only and MP3 (short-time) discs. Of the cheap brands I find M-More to be well constructed.

For movies, I use Verbatim DVD-r.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I find CD's with a complete vinyl coat on the top side to have increased longevity (basically the fully printed CDs, not the ones that have a metallic shine on both sides)

I agree only I have given up use of CDs altogether. I use Hard disks. I have one 200GB Fujitsu in a 2.5" USB case one for my laptop backups and my MP3s and a second one for a lossless copy. The originals are on my desktop.

I am waiting for the 200GB 1.8" drives to come so I can upgrade my ipod 60Gb photo to 200GB and run lossless using foopod on my ipod! My bet is Hitachi will get these first as their "TravelStar" technology is an excellent platform for this.

[iraghava]

How's HP nowadays Sam? They are very cheap now and I usually buy them for MP3 and other purposes. Backups I don't need to do on them since for that I have my 2 external HDD's (410GB's of space!)

I've personally always had problems with Moser Baer CD's (for MP3 use) hence now stick to HP. Anyother brands out there which are not comparatively much expensive but have better performance?

[d.kiran]

Originally Posted by navin

I am waiting for the 200GB 1.8" drives to come so I can upgrade my ipod 60Gb photo to 200GB and run lossless using foopod on my ipod! My bet is Hitachi will get these first as their "TravelStar" technology is an excellent platform for this.

I thought the 1.8" in Hitachi maxed out at 80GB. Toshiba is available at 100GB.

One more thing, you mentioned lossless using foopod. Are you running FLAC or ALAC on your iPod? If FLAC, is it using rockbox? Has anyone here tried rockbox. I am scared of firmware upgrades. I lost a phone that way :-(.

[navin]

Originally Posted by d.kiran

One more thing, you mentioned lossless using foopod. Are you running FLAC or ALAC on your iPod? If FLAC, is it using rockbox? Has anyone here tried rockbox. I am scared of firmware upgrades. I lost a phone that way :-(.

neither. I am not using lossless on my ipod as yet. I am waiting for the bigger hard drives. For me to use lossless I need 200GB.

BTW I was talking about 2.5" drives. Big 1.8" drives are expected later this year or early next year. For 1.8" I expect 120-150GB in late 2007 or early 2008 and 200GB by late 2008 or early 2009.

My lossless version is WavPack.

[d.kiran]

Oh OK. Thanks.

Not sure if this is offtopic, but would you/anyone else be able to help me out about differences between the various lossless formats? I assumed that since the music is lossless all of them should sound the same. But looks like it is not the case. I have been trolling hydrogenaudio and other such forums but I cant seem to get a definitive answer.

Most answers seem to be to give a listen and find out. But the problem is that at this moment, I cant seem to find differences between the various lossless stuff. Taking a leaf out of your book, if I learn to listen better as I get older, then I dont want to regret ripping in the wrong format later on..

The reason is between the both of us me and my bro have managed to build up a fairly big CD library (around 600 when I left). And now he is gonna get married. So I want to let him have all the CDs as he prefers them anyway. And I now need to convert them into lossless. (Call them offsite backup if you will)

Any and all help would be appreciated.

P.S: @mithun, sorry for hijacking your thread, but I think this thread contains a lot of good info that could help newbies :-)

[navin]

Originally Posted by d.kiran

Not sure if this is offtopic, but would you/anyone else be able to help me out about differences between the various lossless formats? I assumed that since the music is lossless all of them should sound the same.

The reason is between the both of us me and my bro have managed to build up a fairly big CD library (around 600 when I left). And now he is gonna get married. So I want to let him have all the CDs as he prefers them anyway. And I now need to convert them into lossless. (Call them offsite backup if you will)

I have heard Flac and Wavpack. I have not heard Monkey. On my PC system I could NOT tell the difference between FLAC and WavPack but I could tell the difference between LAME APE VBR and Wavpack. I used a variation of LAME APE VBR for my ipod. BTW we are very OT. So lets get back On Topic. Ok?

[mainak]

@d.kiran
i have used rockbox on my ipod. You can use themes and skins for your ipod. I am not too sure if you can play other formats than the one supported originally.

[swathyd]

It is very sad that now audiophiles are in agony. I was planning for separates(cd player, amp+ speakers) for my home. But decided not to pursue as finding quality software could be an issue. And when i made an attempt to find quality music, people started to ask whether i am mad to go for such stuff when there are plenty of places ready to write and mp3s readily available.

I still remember when we used to get high quality music hindi, malayalam, tamil and english all digitally mastered outside india. The SQ was simply gorgeous even tapes recorded from those sounded better than todays original CDs.

[d.kiran]

Originally Posted by swathyd

But decided not to pursue as finding quality software could be an issue. And when i made an attempt to find quality music, people started to ask whether i am mad to go for such stuff when there are plenty of places ready to write and mp3s readily available..

It's not always about the equipment. What I built for my home stereo is a very very modest piece of equipment by "audiophile" (a term that is way way overused) standards. By the standards of my friends, it is an extravagant luxury by a spoilt brat. It does not matter. A decent system can make an average quality sound good (though in certain cases, it can be more transparent thereby bringing out the deficiency in the sound)

And before navin-ji throws his isodiscs at me for going OT, the point to the OP is this. If you love your audio and music and you constantly think feel something is lacking or you feel that you could make your music sound better, you *definitely* need to start with a serious ICE.

If you are happy with the sound of your music and you find yourself enjoying without anything intruding into your music, then you can go and get yourself a basic ICE.

Eventually, all everyone is trying to do is enjoy the music that we love. Some people might lose sight of that in quest for better equipment :-).

P.S: I just realised that It looks like I am judging. I am not. Its just priorities. I, for example, do not consider buying a house or saving money for the future as an important thing, not everyone is that stupid.