Its a Jukebox not an Mp3 Player!!!!!!!!

J

jason5_k

Guest
Hi, isn't the mp3 format old and rubbish compared to others???
Since 128kb/s mp3 is the same as 64kb/s wma and 64kb/s Atrac3plus is the same quality as 128kb/s wma etc etc etc Why do people use mp3s when there are better alternatives for less size??????

P.S I refuse to call my music thingy an mp3 player cos there are no mp3s on it, I call it a Jukebox.
 
M

mick's cat

Guest
That's why most people call them digital audio players (DAPs) actually.
 

doctorjuggles

Active Member
mp3s are ubiquitous and, ripped correctly using VBR/LAME/EAC, offer an excellent level of reproduction.

What you have to remember is that while all companies seem hell-bent on pushing their own proprietary formats regardless of what the users want, mp3 capability remains pretty much constant on all of them, and therefore is the format of choice. Looking at your posting history and your problems with your current player being unable to play wma, you should be able to appreciate the convenience of having everything in one format that will play on almost any player you choose.

I'd also be very, very wary of claims that 128kbps of format X is only as good as 64kbps of format Y when it's normally a specific company making those claims. They usually have their own agenda.

Head over to HydrogenAudio's forums for a fair, balanced and scientific take on the issue.

And technically, a jukebox is a big thing with records in. You may be referring to a digital jukebox, but again, the definiton is hazy on that. The more popular name, as has been eloquently pointed out, is a DAP
 
J

jason5_k

Guest
Okay thanks, this whole digital audio is quite confusing, and I thought I knew it all.
 
L

lukey

Guest
remember aswell that mp3 is supported by virtually all types of players and thats one of its advantages, the problems with formats such as aac or atrac is that they are specific to a particular player so if your ipod or sony hd goes arse up then you either have to replace it with another or re rip your entire collection again.

Mp3 whilst being an old format still provides excellent quality, i rip in 320 kbs vbr which for me gives near cd quality, admitidly it takes up more space but thats only an issue if your intending to rip 10000 tracks onto a 20 gb drive.

Quality, as one poster has already said, is a subjective word. Some people cannot notice the difference between and mp3 in 128 or 320kbs or between an mp3 and an atrac or aac file. I have downloaded from itunes whose aac compression rate is much poorer in quality that what im used to in mp3 so its not that easy trying to compare like with like
 
D

DiGdUb

Guest
i rip my songs in mp3 format even though my player plays ogg. i learnt a painful lesson previously when i switched from an ogg-capable player to one that does not support ogg and had to re-rip half of my collection back to mp3. stick with the widely used mp3 format unless you have golden ears.
 
L

lukey

Guest
yep...same thing happened to me when i ripped 200 cds into atrac then my sony hd went bust, didnt want another sony so had to re-rip to mp3, wont be caught out again thats why i will always use mp3 in future.!!!
 
S

Sasso

Guest
Some formats are preferred not only because they have better compression but they allow gapless playback, eg, sony's atrac
 
L

lukey

Guest
Sasso said:
Some formats are preferred not only because they have better compression but they allow gapless playback, eg, sony's atrac
yep thats right...its all comes down to what your priorities are when choosing a dap
 
On the subject of formats whats the highest quality to use on say iTunes with a Nano? As in bitrate? I cant tell much difference from 256k and 320k bit rates at which bit rate is their noticeable difference in audio? i.e. 64k to 256k?
 

doctorjuggles

Active Member
SuperSaiyan4 said:
On the subject of formats whats the highest quality to use on say iTunes with a Nano? As in bitrate? I cant tell much difference from 256k and 320k bit rates at which bit rate is their noticeable difference in audio? i.e. 64k to 256k?
That's a question only you can answer, because everyone has different hearing. So rip a song you know well at various different bitrates and listen to it at all those bitrates. However low you can go without noticing a difference, that's the one you should choose.
 

Steven

Senior Moderator
Hell just buy a 60/80gb DAP and have your music lossless :D
 

drmoze

Standard Member
LFC_SL said:
Hell just buy a 60/80gb DAP and have your music lossless :D
A 60-80 gb DAP wouldn't come close to holding my music in a lossless format. I have close to (or maybe a bit more than) 1000 albums. Can't even quite fit them onto my 20gb HD5 at 64kbps, so they wouldn't even fit on an 80gb unit at 256 lossy format.

(And yes, I *like* being able to pick out whatever I may be in the mood to listen to at any time, and not have to go back to my pc to transfer stuff. ;) )
 

Trending threads

Latest news

T+A expands E-Series with PA 1100E integrated amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bowers & Wilkins unveils new PX wireless ANC headphones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Roku Premiere streaming device with 4K HDR hits UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
CTA launches 8K UHD TV display certification programme
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Huawei launches Google-less Mate 30 and Mate 30 Pro phones
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom