[karankapoor]

Originally Posted by devrajman

I have been using this since ages and is as good as CD quality

i don't agree with you on the above statement there is a big difference between mp3 and audio cd, which you will come to know when you listen it on a high end system.

[devrajman]

high end systems are must be just 5%, also who have High End systems should stick to original audio cds.

[navin]

Originally Posted by karankapoor

i don't agree with you on the above statement there is a big difference between mp3 and audio cd, which you will come to know when you listen it on a high end system.

Originally Posted by devrajman

high end systems are must be just 5%, also who have High End systems should stick to original audio cds.

Actually on many systems (I dont understand the definition of high end but I dont consider my system very high end) the difference between MP3 and CD is quite noticeable if one listens carefully. It is only that most times in a car with traffic and honking and such distractions one does not get this opportunity.

[karankapoor]

sir, i totally agree with you but one can not make out the difference on a entry level system (worth Rs 10/20k). Both mp3 and audio cd will sound the same.

I really want to know which audio system you are using both in car and home.

[alpha1]

Navin: Mp3 at 320kbps compared to AdioCD?

[navin]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Navin: Mp3 at 320kbps compared to AdioCD?

Yes atleast on the systems I have compared them from my PC system (Altec FX6021), car system, etc..

Originally Posted by karankapoor

sir, i totally agree with you but one can not make out the difference on a entry level system (worth Rs 10/20k). Both mp3 and audio cd will sound the same.

I really want to know which audio system you are using both in car and home.

Neither my home or car system can be called entry level or for that matter high end either.

On a basic HU+4 speaker system I dont know.

[valhallen.282]

Yes the differences are audible i got a disc that was a direct recording from a studio reel of some very very well known tracks and you can tell the difference between ACD and mp3 in a blind test even on mid-level speakers. i have an sbs370 installed at work and a vs3251 at home and panasonic inears. the difference is audible in the midbass and in the treble. but only IF you really pay attention. all systems run flat as a rule. however nothing beats FLAC. but for the size to quality ratio it has to 320k cbr mp3. ACD will remain the way it is, i would rather keep my ACD's and flog my mp3's until my sound card dies like my old yam AC97.

[mithun]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Navin: Mp3 at 320kbps compared to AdioCD?

I've tried comparing Audio CD & MP3@320 kbps ripped using EAC on a entry level PC systems. But couldn't notice any difference !

[Andy Wehmeyer]

Hmmm...I think the real question ought to be "does data compression diminish my ability to enjoy the music?" I use 256k MP3s almost exculsively.

[sk456]

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

Hmmm...I think the real question ought to be "does data compression diminish my ability to enjoy the music?" I use 256k MP3s almost exculsively.

Well to put it another perspective.Non-Compressed music could increase the enjoyment greatly couldnt it !! It all depends on what one is looking for !!!

[navin]

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

Hmmm...I think the real question ought to be "does data compression diminish my ability to enjoy the music?" I use 256k MP3s almost exculsively.

Great point. I can distinguish Audio CD from MP3 (256k VBR using EAC and LAME) in my car but still for most uses I end up carrying my ipod (with the Mp3s) in my car. Even over headphones (atleast in the car) I om ok with MP3 for non critical listening. Critical listening for me is defined as when one is looking for defects or anamolies instead of listening to the music itself.

Andy, great to have you back.

[navin]

Originally Posted by sk456

Well to put it another perspective.Non-Compressed music could increase the enjoyment greatly couldnt it !! It all depends on what one is looking for !!!

I think what Andy was getting at was that if the music is on MP3 vs CD how much less do you enjoy it? Many recording artists have pretty ordinary audio systems for their homes. Much of my enjoyment when listening comes from the memories the music brings.

Remember not long ago Compact Cassette was the preferred medium for sending and distributing "demos". It was a practical medium and offered adequate resolution for the record company to determine if the artist was worth investing in.

On a related note I have noticed that CD pressings made in India (atleast the ones I have purchased) are not as good as the ones I have got from the US or Europe.

[frankmehta]

yes, that's an inherent problem in indian recordings. international recordings sound way way better than indian stuff.
i second andy though. all this lossless and wav and uncompressed business is good to speak about, but quite impractical, if one has to carry a lot of music. i would say i enjoy my music even if a 128kbps track is playing on my system.

[pranava999]

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

Hmmm...I think the real question ought to be "does data compression diminish my ability to enjoy the music?" I use 256k MP3s almost exculsively.

Very Very good point Andy.

Hi people. Have been following this thread right from the very first post. Have been restraining my self from giving my 2 paise, but could not resist anymore and here it is.
I was a regular CD buyer till my portable mp3 came along. The cds gave way to mp3 because of the convenience.As i educated myself on bit rates. CD to mp3 was done only at 192 or above. I heard of FLAC just a few weeks ago and got my hands on a the Floyd's Pulse FLAC version. This is one album I have heard to over a 100 times in the last 14 years or more and my opinion is that ideally a CD is great. Mp3s if ripped at 320 from the original CD source are not bad at all and FLAC comes closest to CD quality sound.

However it's a matter of convenience and listening pleasure. This is where Andy and Navin make such handy observations. If one is so particular about SQ and has ultra sensitive ears, that sound an alarm every time a sound/freq is not reproduced exactly to the nth degree of accuracy as per the original source, then it's best to stick to CDs. I just believe that this whole thing is very relative.

Have heard a difference between CDs bought abroad and CDs that are recorded here (non-imports)
There is an obvious diff between CD and Mp3 --> convenience is the deciding factor
Glaring difference between tracks ripped from the original source at 128 - 192 - 320 amongst themselves.
Definitely a diff between low bit rates mp3s (<256 and FLAC)
Difference between 320 and FLAC is not very noticible in most circumstances and depends on how sensitive your ears are,how accurately you can recall the original sound from the CD and of course the listening environment.

Bottom linefor me,is how Andy has summed it up . As long as I can enjoy the track I'm happy.


Please don't me.

[low_bass_makker]

Originally Posted by navin

Much of my enjoyment when listening comes from the memories the music brings.

Remember not long ago Compact Cassette was the preferred medium for sending and distributing "demos".

On a related note I have noticed that CD pressings made in India (atleast the ones I have purchased) are not as good as the ones I have got from the US or Europe.

Very true...There are situations when one is enjoying music and at time one is auditioning a setup. I am happy with MP3 till it plays good on my setup. But prefer Audio CD while doing serious listening.

When there was the time of cassettes then there were exotic ones were there also like METAL, Bias, Normal....and they all sounded very different.

Very true again, Indian made cd are very bad, I think the manufacture does some EQ which making them, I have few of them and they sound horrible. some times MP3 from the net is better.