VGMdb
Go Back   VGMdb Forums > Discussion > Miscellaneous Discussion
Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old Nov 18, 2008, 06:03 PM
mrnutz's Avatar
mrnutz mrnutz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 98
Default CD vs. MP3

This question was inspired by seeing pictures of seanne's huge CD collection in another thread, many of them in pastic sleeves. Perhaps it's funny to ask in the age of the iPod, but how many people listen to their CD originals vs. MP3s that they've ripped? Or, do you rip them into a lossless format? Personally, I only listen to the mp3s, with all my discs packed away. Saves space, more convenient and sounds good enough for me.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 01:11 AM
Cedille Cedille is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 2,027
Default

Since my ears suck, compression at a higher bit rate than 192kbps doesn't really has substantial merit to me. I once managed to encode albums at two different compression settings (lossless for the interior listen session and, lossy for the exterior), but it was tiring, and I ultimately noticed there wasn't much difference between them.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 04:00 AM
eternal_tsukasa's Avatar
eternal_tsukasa eternal_tsukasa is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 106
Default

I've begun to start ripping my CDs with EAC and convert from the lossless copies I make now. I enjoy VBR V0/V1 quality at most but anything else doesn't bother me. I prefer to encode my stuff that way if possible to get the most out of my music. OGG Vorbis is also another format I've begun to enjoy as well, despite the low amount of support it has among electronics compared to the other standard formats. Both VBR and OGG are my top formats for me when it comes to music.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 04:07 AM
Gigablah's Avatar
Gigablah Gigablah is offline
VGMdb Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,397
Default

Nowadays I just make a single wav/cue dump of a CD using EAC. It takes up an obscene amount of space, but I have plenty of free space anyway so it doesn't matter. Foobar takes cuesheets happily, and if I want an individual track I can quickly encode it from the context menu.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 05:48 AM
Carl's Avatar
Carl Carl is offline
VGMdb Staff
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 892
Default

My CDs stay minty-fresh all wrapped up on the shelf, it's so much faster and convenient to browse mp3s, which I keep on external HDs.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 06:01 AM
Razakin's Avatar
Razakin Razakin is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hämeenlinna, Finland
Posts: 592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
My CDs stay minty-fresh all wrapped up on the shelf, it's so much faster and convenient to browse mp3s, which I keep on external HDs.
Same here. Thought, should go the process of ripping all of my albums to FLAC-format. And scanning the booklets. Maybe I really should start it before my collection hits over 300 albums. :P
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 06:26 AM
seanne's Avatar
seanne seanne is offline
VGMdb Staff
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,202
Default

The main problem with CDs is that listening to them just isn't very convenient compared to listening to digital music through a computer or portable player. It's nice to listened to them once in a while though, but I really only do it if I'm not doing anything else at the same time, or if I'm working on my collection; browsing, looking though booklets, putting in new CDs, dusting, etc.
__________________
VGMdb group on last.fm
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 11:46 AM
mrnutz's Avatar
mrnutz mrnutz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 98
Default

So EAC is Exact Audio Copy? I'm not much of an audiophile, had never heard of this or Foobar. Are these the best tools you've encountered, Blah?

I use iTunes to rip and manage my MP3s, tags and album art.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Nov 19, 2008, 07:45 PM
Razakin's Avatar
Razakin Razakin is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hämeenlinna, Finland
Posts: 592
Default

Well, EAC is the best ripping tool there is, and yes, it's Exact Audio Copy. And foobar, in my opinion, is the best audio player there is, and for a bonus, it's a freeware.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Nov 20, 2008, 03:11 AM
eternal_tsukasa's Avatar
eternal_tsukasa eternal_tsukasa is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnutz View Post
So EAC is Exact Audio Copy? I'm not much of an audiophile, had never heard of this or Foobar. Are these the best tools you've encountered, Blah?

I use iTunes to rip and manage my MP3s, tags and album art.
EAC and foobar2000 are definitely the best two tools alone that'll give you the best out of your rips. I usually just convert the entire album into a uncompressed single WAV file with a CUE sheet, which is vital in getting the album to play since it contains track information and such. I encode the WAV into a lossless format like TTA for example, then play it in foobar with the CUE sheet and convert it to MP3 VBR V0.

I've started to dabble into this whole lossless scene now since I've been converting tons of stuff from lossless batches of Touhou and Doujin music lately. It's all up to you though if you really want to get the most out of your music. EAC is the best tool there is to get your rips accurate as they can be, and foobar is probably one of the better media players out there because of the functions it has. The interface design isn't very appealing at first but it's highly customizable from what I've known so you can pretty much tweak it out to whatever fits for you.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Nov 20, 2008, 07:14 AM
CaptainCommando CaptainCommando is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 107
Default

Lossless is the way to go. However, MP3 is also required.

Lossless is required because it preserves your music in full quality. MP3 is a LOSSY format, even using LAME VBR. This is because MP3 encoders will ALWAYS selectively remove information. If you have good speakers or headphones, you can tell the difference.

For this reason, you should have your discs backed up into lossless in one place and your mp3s in another. MP3s are needed so you can have your music portable - otherwise, portable storage of FLAC is simply unfeasible at the moment. However, storage is VERY cheap these days: DVDs cost 20c or less and you can get a 1TB hard drive for $100. When you can get a gigabyte for 10c or less, the size difference between say FLAC and APE is nonexistant.

There are many different lossless formats, but FLAC, Apple Lossless, and WMA Lossless are the main ones. Apple and WMA are proprietary, but will be around for a LONG time because they are owned by Apple and Micro$oft. FLAC is open-source and has a strong following, so I believe this makes it the proper choice. But all formats are interchangeable, being lossless.

I've also seen people use OGGs. I stay away from those as they are less compatible with Apple products. They take up less space, but again, the storage size is negligible, even for a 4GB iPod.

However, I'm not sure about uncompressed WAV. I posted a thread about this awhile back on what kind of 'standard' we might want for VGM archival (and more importantly, the inclusion of .cue sheets on the VGMdb):

http://vgmdb.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1397

Hydrogen Audio discusses the different types of cue sheets and ways of ripping the albums:

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Cuesheet

I haven't begun my lossless ripping process yet as I'm still trying to figure out the best format for archival. I thought FLAC+Cue was the best, but WAV would make it simpler to reconstruct the original disc (which is the whole point of archival). However, WAV would probably take up about 20% more space on average, which IS something to note... But even then, you probably won't notice it anyway unless you've got hundreds of albums. And then you'd be trading off space for time, and I think time is more valuable to us. I shy away from single-track rips only because it's impossible to view the tracks individually without loading the entire file. Thankfully, I don't have 300 albums (I'm closer to 30 :P) but that's still a LOT of work (especially when you include games with CD audio).

EDIT: On second thought, I'm thinking WAV might be the way to go for archival backups. For one thing, every WAV file will be the same size, while FLAC will have varying file sizes depending on the compression.

WAV > FLAC/Lossless > MP3/OGG/Lossy

Your lossy format would be required for portability. However, WAV or Lossless would be required for archival, and if WAV is better due to speed, closeness to original format, and stable file sizes (even though lacking in size), then that would be the format to use. Thankfully, you could restore the original album with lossless if you had the cue sheet (and ideally sfv) to verify the WAV after conversion. As you can see though, the 'conversion' part takes more time.

Last edited by CaptainCommando; Nov 20, 2008 at 07:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Nov 20, 2008, 07:44 AM
Mika's Avatar
Mika Mika is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: FI
Posts: 123
Default

I always rip my CDs as soon as I possibly can to -V0 mp3s with an EAC LAME super ultimate combo. I used to think about doing lossless instead, but as it is I would have to keep two copies from every album on the HD then, one lossless and one mp3 for any portable players I happen to carry at any given time. Just not worth the trouble, not like I can hear the difference between lossless and high bitrate vbr file anyway.

Also, foobar for the win.

I used to use coverart as well with foobar, but that was pretty pointless as well. The way I use it, it's always in the background, so what's the point of coverart if you rarely even see it?
__________________
Collection
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Nov 20, 2008, 01:40 PM
Cypher's Avatar
Cypher Cypher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 159
Default

I recall that there are already some portable music players that support lossless format(mostly FLAC that is).

Last edited by Cypher; Nov 20, 2008 at 01:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 05:38 AM
tebian's Avatar
tebian tebian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 13
Default

Not to crash the parade here but the one of the hottest selling items this Chirstmas is "record" players. Take a look at Penny's or Bj's ads in USA and there is about 20 of them, even one's for components to a "stereo system". We did go lose less for some music when it became just a file and something you sat down and enjoyed.. big "lose".

(hehe just an opinion from old music lover who plays tracks all day long)
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 09:05 AM
Carl's Avatar
Carl Carl is offline
VGMdb Staff
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 892
Default

I've bought VGM vinyl records and played them on a turntable, how is that raining on our parade?
Enjoyment is in the subject material, in any medium.

Last edited by Carl; Dec 7, 2008 at 09:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 10:00 AM
tebian's Avatar
tebian tebian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 13
Default

I thought the discussion was the lose of the sound in two formats or at least part of why you would choice one over the other. I was pointing out that there are still some who feel that like with records it enhances the enjoyment of the music to hear "non error free" music. And was just and anecdotal comment not meant to insight problems, sorry about that sir.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 10:36 AM
Gigablah's Avatar
Gigablah Gigablah is offline
VGMdb Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,397
Default

The discussion was over one's preference of listening direct from the original media or from a ripped file. There's not a whole lot of VGM on vinyls anyway (you can find a list of them through advanced search).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 10:55 AM
Secret Squirrel's Avatar
Secret Squirrel Secret Squirrel is offline
VGMdb Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 5,934
Default

What I'd really like to hear is VGM on a Phonograph Cylinder
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old Dec 7, 2008, 01:41 PM
Carl's Avatar
Carl Carl is offline
VGMdb Staff
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 892
Default

Yeah it is sometimes a paradox which formats end up being widely used, tebian. Thankfully, formats are easily transferable these days.

As for vgm on a phonograph cylinder, it'd sound like this. 1918, baby! Or this from the "Green Bros. Novelty Orchestra" in 1920

Last edited by Carl; Dec 7, 2008 at 01:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old Dec 22, 2008, 12:01 PM
mrnutz's Avatar
mrnutz mrnutz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 98
Default

Thanks for the detailed info, CaptainCommando. Saves me from getting off my lazy ass and doing the research myself.

I'm feeling like a bit of a lamer for ripping and storing my stuff only in a lossy format. Perhaps I'll do yet another (lossless) rip when I eventually get a BD burner.

Tangent: has anyone run into CD Rot? I've got some older VGM discs (1992) and have not experienced this, thankfully. Maybe it's tied to inferior pressings.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old Dec 23, 2008, 04:56 AM
pepak's Avatar
pepak pepak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnutz View Post
Tangent: has anyone run into CD Rot?
Yes, though not on game music CDs (yet).
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old Apr 15, 2009, 06:48 PM
vnvnvn2000 vnvnvn2000 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
Default

I only hear flac - lossless musics, i think the mp3 good but if you hear lossless music one time, you could feel the different. I download flac music from torrent site. I don't have money to buy CDs
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old Apr 16, 2009, 04:22 AM
tebian's Avatar
tebian tebian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
Yeah it is sometimes a paradox which formats end up being widely used, tebian. Thankfully, formats are easily transferable these days.

As for vgm on a phonograph cylinder, it'd sound like this. 1918, baby! Or this from the "Green Bros. Novelty Orchestra" in 1920
good grief ... necro !!

i remember this discussion and still love my records for the loss and noise !

been long time now since i thought about this and with running the radio for a year now, i seen a lot more about the various formats and the loss

let me tell you streaming mp3's the listeners can really tell the difference and i try hard to start with the best quality i can then stream at the various bit rates

i am stuck with mp3 file cause of the broadcast software i use
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old Apr 16, 2009, 02:07 PM
LuxKiller65's Avatar
LuxKiller65 LuxKiller65 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 696
Default

I usually listen to my original CDs, except when I consider them rare and/or expensive or when they're still factory sealed. I love using my portable CD player and my living room Kenwood reader.

MP3 is cool in planes, trains, when using the computer and for tough to find soundtracks; that's it.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old Apr 16, 2009, 03:25 PM
CaptainCommando CaptainCommando is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 107
Default

Quote:
Tangent: has anyone run into CD Rot? I've got some older VGM discs (1992) and have not experienced this, thankfully. Maybe it's tied to inferior pressings.
I certainly HOPE nobody is having problems with bit rot on old VGM albums, but I suspect there are a few at risk. Any reports?

Regarding MP3 vs FLAC, portable audio players have so much storage these days that you can put quite a few albums in lossless on there, so there's no need to take lossy audio on the go. Unless you're stuck with a 4GB player like me :P (actually, it's only 2.5 b/c the flash storage went bad!).

I also keep many of my albums sealed. This causes a problem though if I want to listen to them and don't have access to lossless audio...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old Apr 17, 2009, 03:39 AM
Crash Crash is offline
Trusted Editor
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 199
Default

I'm like LuxKiller. I listen to all my music from a real-life CD player. Sometimes originals, but usually CD-R copies. I haven't tried to to archive my library digitally, but if I do, I'll probably try to go lossless if possible (unless that prevents me from loading my music up onto a portable player).
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old Apr 18, 2009, 09:31 AM
rorirub rorirub is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6
Default

I play all my music on my computer or mp3 player. My CDs are ripped in proper flac, backed up to dvds, and from that they are converted to mp3 -V 0 --vbr-new.

I plan on ditching dvd backups due to the huge amount of tag editing that invalidates them, but I need to buy a couple of tb hdds first.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old Apr 18, 2009, 09:56 AM
Metroid's Avatar
Metroid Metroid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Default

Just to clear things up. An Wav file is the raw audio data, nothing except the audio information is stored. Flac, Monkey APE, True Audio TTA and many others are programs that compress the Wav file. These programs do not modify the Wav File. So Lossless formats are made of compressed raw data. The interesting part is that Wav files are not better than Flac files, they are the same as far as the audio information is concerned. The information that both formats provide to the audio program like Winamp or Foobar is the same. The only thing that Winamp or Foobar will do is decode the information of these formats. That is the reason we have plugins for many lossless formats as the algorithms of each one differs.

So Wav = Flac or any lossless format concerning the Audio Information.

The reality is Flac > Wav because it can store the file's information in the end of the stream and gives the the same quality as an Wav file and at same time saves space, just like Winrar or Winzip.

And one more thing MP3 is limited to 32Hkz whereas Wave files can go as far as 192Hkz if I'm not mistaken. So as the storage hardware gets cheaper as the MP3 files are becoming more and more useless due to the nature that we do not need it any more. It was good while it lasted but now its over and the MP3 format should be buried.

Hope it helps,

Last edited by Metroid; Apr 18, 2009 at 10:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old Apr 20, 2009, 08:03 AM
pepak's Avatar
pepak pepak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid View Post
An Wav file is the raw audio data, nothing except the audio information is stored.
Even if you really ment that, it would not be necessarily correct - WAV can contain other data, too, although there are very few if any such WAVs in existence.
But I suspect you meant that WAV is uncompressed PCM. That would not be true at all - WAV can carry just about any compression scheme, lossy or lossless.

Quote:
The reality is Flac > Wav because it can store the file's information in the end of the stream and gives the the same quality as an Wav file and at same time saves space, just like Winrar or Winzip.
Don't forget e.g. error detection. Another huge plus for FLAC and co. (WAV could allow that, too, in theory).

Quote:
And one more thing MP3 is limited to 32Hkz whereas Wave files can go as far as 192Hkz if I'm not mistaken.
You are mistaken. MP3 can go at least to 48000 Hz, possibly more, and there is no practical limit for WAVs (I mean, 4 GHz can hardly be considered a limit).

Quote:
So as the storage hardware gets cheaper as the MP3 files are becoming more and more useless due to the nature that we do not need it any more. It was good while it lasted but now its over and the MP3 format should be buried.
I agree completely.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old Apr 20, 2009, 11:37 AM
Metroid's Avatar
Metroid Metroid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepak View Post
You are mistaken. MP3 can go at least to 48000 Hz, possibly more, and there is no practical limit for WAVs (I mean, 4 GHz can hardly be considered a limit).
http://true-audio.com/Tau_Analyzer_-...icity_Detector

Check if your MP3's can go as high as 48Hkz or even as high as 33 Khz.

Compare a CDDA Album x MP3 Album

A CDDA Album is 2 channels of 22Khz, check how far can MP3 files go. that program will tell you.

If MP3 files could hold as much as true 44Hkz don't you think we should be using it instead of Wav files as it would be less space and same quality?

Regards,

Last edited by Metroid; Apr 20, 2009 at 11:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump