Guest Anonymous Posted October 19, 2003 Report Share Posted October 19, 2003 I have a large md collection and am going to transfer it to mp3. I use Mac with i tunes. I don't think , even with net md, I can transfer with Mac directly to the computer, correct? If so let me know. I have no idea how to do it. I have cd backups of all my md's and was going to use those anyway, I just want to ask, does anyone think the sound quality would be any better from md to the computer then to mp3 as opposed to what I am doing, md to cdr (at real time, no compression) then to mp3. -- the cdr backups sound exact to md's. I have to say, that from an original cd to mp3 to i pod sound is great at 128, 192, whatever. And my mds sounds great too! they sound exactly like orginial cds to me. But from my md's (then to cd's real time, no compression) and then to mp3, the sound is worse! I'm so upset. In retrospect I wish I had just done whole collection no compression then to cdr, and not used md's at all, but I never knew I'd want to try mp3's. I guess one compression is fine ( mds sound perfect to me), but then another to mp3, and then things get bad. Any help appreciated. thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAjEsTiC Posted October 20, 2003 Report Share Posted October 20, 2003 to my knowledge i don't think there is ne official software that will allow netmd transfers from a mac...there are however user made programs (i can't remember the link sorry so if ne1 else knows that is reading this thread could help me out, then that would be good) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 20, 2003 Report Share Posted October 20, 2003 Does that make sense about what I said about my mds sounding perfect, but then when I rip it to mp3's they sound worse than ripping directly from cd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 20, 2003 Report Share Posted October 20, 2003 Kevs, When ripping to your computer and then converting to MP3 format, are you using a sampling bitrate equal to or better then your current one in MD format? SP = 292kbps LP2 = ~132kbps LP4 = ~66kbps I haven't tried it myself, but in theory, if you use a bitrate equal or higher than the on on your MD in both processes (recording your audio realtime and then converting to MP3), it should sound the same as on you MD. Manuel Feliz H22CRXSOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 20, 2003 Report Share Posted October 20, 2003 thanks Manuel. I did not know those md bit rates. I've been transferring to mp3 or AAc at 128 and 192, but the difference in quality so such huge compared to starting from original cd that I don't think going higher will change too much. One problem was that when I started 4 years ago going from cd to md, I chose to do it with analog, not digital, I can't remember why, maybe the machine was cheaper or they did not have that option when I started out. the upshot is that while that analog transfer to my ears sounds perfect next to original cd, now going to mps may be bad news, not to mention I have to manually type in all song/artist info! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAjEsTiC Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 forgot to add on from what Manuel said above that when you want to record from MD -> mp3 make sure at least you record in this bitrate for mp3's for : ~ SP record at least at 320kbps mp3 ~ LP2 at least at 192kbps ~ LP4 at least 96kbps these are approx the mp3 equivalent to MD's ATRAC encoding rates so i suggest that as a minimum you record at these bitrates... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 Kevs, What mAjEsTiC did is exactly what I did. I had a Techno MD I made a year ago via analog in LP 2 with my MZ-R500. I wanted to upload the songs to my computer into MP3 format for further use as well as copy them to my new MD unit. I gave the Win NMD program a try. Awesome little program for NetMD units. Knowing that I was going to put the songs on my other MD disc loaded with MP3's in LP4 by using SimplerMD, I recorded my Source disk using the High Quality setting in WinNMD (128kbps mp3). Since I was then going to go LP4 96kbps, that was more than enough for my final conversion. Sounds great too. I'm using a Sony MZ-N10 and JVC HA-B27 headphones Manuel Feliz US Airforce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 Manuel, you're wrong on two counts. 1) The is no such thing as "sampling bitrate." There is the sampling rate, which determines the accuracy of the frequency response, and there's the bitrate, which is determines how large the resultant file will be. Also though your bitrate comparisons seem about right for crappy P2P MP3's, for proper MP3's the comparison is more like: SP=~256kbps MP3 LP2=128 or 160kbps MP3 LP4=64kbps MP3 2) MP3 and ATRAC are lossy encoders. What this means is that what you get out of them is never identical to what goes in. Sure you can minimize the loss by using a higher bitrate when going from one to another, but you really have to ask yourself if it's worth turning LP4 tracks into 320kbps MP3's or recording 80kbps MP3's to SP minidisc tracks, to give extreme examples. Also, I'm shocked that any serious software designer could label 128kbps MP3 as "high quality." Well, I guess I'm not surprised that you aren't disgusted by the lack of quality, considering you record music in analogue, and in LP4. No offense meant there. Still, thanks for the contribution. ... kevs, if the CD's were copied digitally from the MD's, then there's really no advantage to copying from MD to MP3 rather than CD to MP3. CD to MP3 will give you the same quality with much less work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 Nren: thanks for terrific and lucid reply. Actually all my mds, all 600 of them, were made at sp mode. I started four years ago, and my cd player did not have an optical out. I think they were rare at that time. I did some test doing it on analog, and I still have to say, the results are stupendous. The sound coming out of the cd, playing back to back with md always sounds essentially identical. Also, at the time, I didn't care less about seeing the songs on the md player since I was writing them down on the case. Now, of course, I'm pissed off becasue I'm going to have to manually enter all songs and album info down, and the quality of the mp3files is much worse from once the music has been on an md -- as you stated. Here is a new question, just to contradict myself, just a bit. One song I was testing, a remastered Evil Ways -- Santana, sounds better off the original CD than my md version. One thing I hated about cassette tapes, was that after you made them (metal tapes) they sounded great, but year later, the sound was crap. Could this happen with md's? I re-recorded that song on a new md and is sounds perfect. And I've tested a few other songs --other md's-- , and they sound great. Perhaps it's a fluke thing. Maybe a setting was off that day I made that recording, but do md's deteriorate in sound quality in way that cassettes do?? thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazirker Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 MD's sound does not deteriorate over time. That's some kind of fluke, something must've happened when you were recording the original disc a long time ago. Hey NRen, I slightly disagree with your comparison between mp3 and atrac bitrates. I'd say digitally recorded SP sounds like 320 kbps mp3 (essentially perfect), LP2 sounds like 160 kbps mp3, and LP4...well who cares, it sounds like crap anyways, but it sounds something like 80 kbps mp3. By the way, I'm used to mp3's I recorded myself from my own cds using up-to-date LAME encoders. I'm comparing mp3's best with ATRAC Type-S. As kind of a side note...why are all the p2p mp3's so crappy? What are people using to rip their files nowadays, realtime analog recording? It's a mystery to me how people manage to still rip such poor files... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 24, 2003 Report Share Posted October 24, 2003 Hiya Bazirker. I could answer your question by EncSpotting my P2P download folders, but a problem here would be that a good quarter of the music there is stuff I made myself and a good quarter after that is stuff that I made sure was high-quality before I downloaded it. The encoder someone uses seems to vary depending on the type of music he or she is into. Generally, Joe Average who listens to pop, rap, rock, etc. will use either Xing or crummy FhG encoders, because those are what's built into the majority of the idiot-proof jukebox programs out there. And then there are some people out there who are reasonably intelligent, but they fall for Tord Janson's bullsh!t and use Blade, which is an absolutely horrible MP3 encoder in terms of quality, but mindnumbing in terms of encoding speed. ... Now about ATRAC Type S. Is Type S is like Type R but with MDLP enhancements too? I have no experience with it, but just maybe Type S is to ATRAC as Lame is to MP3? In that case, you're right, my comparison is totally off. My comparison is subjective - I'm really comparing ATRAC 4.5 (I own an MZ-R500) with Lame MP3. ... kevs... I know what you mean about that track that sounded best on CD. In fact just tonight (on the bus no less!) I heard what I would call a "relic" on my SP MD of AudioSlave. I can only desribe is vaguely as a srot of "bubbling" of a hihat or cymbal hit (I'm not good with percussion names; I'm not a musician, sorry). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 24, 2003 Report Share Posted October 24, 2003 I'm on Mac now; so my mp3 encoding will be done there? Any opinions on how i tunes handles that? It's so convenient, I don't think I could bother with any other way now. But here is what I've discovered. Playing mp3s on my ipod ( I just got my first one a week ago), I find that all bit rates: 128, 192, and up (AAC -- or mp4) same thing, not better), even uncompressed, sound fantastic-- if ripped from a cd. I honestly don't hear great difference between the but rate. Like I've said, if music came from my md collection, it still sounds great, but not fantastic. But when played back on my home stereo ( with help of monster cable), the mp3 files sound good, but lack volume and clarity. I was really surprised, and have decided, for now, to not sell my md player -- my home unit, with the big remote. I'm gonna keep burning md's at home, but use i pod for everything outside the house like jogging and in the car. I was even debating of doing the mix and burn to cdrs that many do, but it's so much more work than filling up a md, right?. I'm wondering: is the inferior sound at home becasue the i pod is limited in output, wattage etc, and if so, has Sony or Panasonic started making real mp3 home units yet that would be better than an ipod through my home unit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H22CRXSOL Posted October 24, 2003 Report Share Posted October 24, 2003 Manuel, you're wrong on two counts. 1) The is no such thing as "sampling bitrate." There is the sampling rate, which determines the accuracy of the frequency response, and there's the bitrate, which is determines how large the resultant file will be. Also though your bitrate comparisons seem about right for crappy P2P MP3's, for proper MP3's the comparison is more like: SP=~256kbps MP3 LP2=128 or 160kbps MP3 LP4=64kbps MP3 2) MP3 and ATRAC are lossy encoders. What this means is that what you get out of them is never identical to what goes in. Sure you can minimize the loss by using a higher bitrate when going from one to another, but you really have to ask yourself if it's worth turning LP4 tracks into 320kbps MP3's or recording 80kbps MP3's to SP minidisc tracks, to give extreme examples. Also, I'm shocked that any serious software designer could label 128kbps MP3 as "high quality." Well, I guess I'm not surprised that you aren't disgusted by the lack of quality, considering you record music in analogue, and in LP4. No offense meant there. Still, thanks for the contribution. ... kevs, if the CD's were copied digitally from the MD's, then there's really no advantage to copying from MD to MP3 rather than CD to MP3. CD to MP3 will give you the same quality with much less work.NRen2k5 Your right. Those are 2 different terms. Also, I was using comparisons for crappy P2P MP3's since that's what the average Joe uses. A 3:21 long song on my computer is 7.67MB at 320kbps and 44kHz. Yes ATRAC and MP3 are lossy encoders. I know you were using extreme examples, which is why I tried to state earlier to use about the same format as your end product is going to be. Can't really make it any better, but you can try to not let it get too much worse.... No offense taken. I knew it wasn't going to sound as good as the CD I recorded them from over a year ago. I was just trying to minimize the loss from going anaglog LP2 to MP3 to LP4. I'm only recording in LP4 due to me being in the AirForce and being deployed at the moment, I can't carry around too many MDs. But honestly, I was surprised that they sound a WHOLE lot better than I thought they would. I even listen to my MDs through loudspeakers. And yes, the MZ-N10's ATRAC TypeS is definately an improvement. I listened to the same MD I recorded with my MZ-R500 in anaglog LP2 on the N10 with the same headphones and it definately sounded better. Manuel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H22CRXSOL Posted October 29, 2003 Report Share Posted October 29, 2003 Hey Kevs, I found some info that should give you a more overal knowledge about music, specificaly analog versus digital. http://geraldtomyn.tripod.com/digan.htm Enjoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.