Why use mp3s and/or high end amps when...

[ChuteBoxe515 10+ year member]

untouchable-ygpm

 

[desertheat 10+ year member]

[No message]

 

[ran_dogg]

I don't understand why people with $1,000 plus audio systems listen to mp3 quality sound rather than the high quality sound found on CDs. Now dont get me wrong mp3s have their purpose (i.e. portable music) but it is a waste to get an awesome system and use poor quality compressed audio files.
However, they claim to hear the subtle differences between amps for their speakers. I can assure you that a blind test will prove that any properly installed decent quality amplifier (i.e. Kicker, MTX, JBL, Alpine) will sound the same as more high end amplifiers.

High end amps do have many advantages including reliability, cooling, accurate power ratings, high quality contruction, etc. But sound wise, with amp EQ, bass boost etc. disabled, it would be very hard to differentiate the "pure" sound of amps with the same accurate power ratings.

I can tell the difference between an mp3 and a CD on computer speakers but if you changed the amps in my car I would have a hard time telling the difference unless the system was pushed to the limitations of a lower powered amp or the volume was different.

I would suggest spending money on high end speakers and a good install that takes acoustics into consideration before dropping the cash for high end amps. Also mp3 files are inferior sounding audio. They most certainly have no place in even a decent setup.

I'm done.

I agreed with you up until and including "I don't understand."

Other than that, it would seem that you have no clue of what you're talking about.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

But sound wise, with amp EQ, bass boost etc. disabled, it would be very hard to differentiate the "pure" sound of amps with the same accurate power ratings.

How many people actually bypass all that stuff?? Watt = watt doesn't mean

amp = amp. Works great in a lab, but not so much in the real world.

And if you really want to get down to it....CD's aren't all that great SQ wise either. Majority of them are overly compressed in mixing/mastering, killing most of their dynamics.

 

[sumone 10+ year member]

I agreed with you up until and including "I don't understand."
Other than that, it would seem that you have no clue of what you're talking about.

I think it's a viable claim. Of course mp3 is a lossy compression scheme, and with any lossy compression, the exact audio signal is "lost". I think it's a matter of whether you really think the difference in quality is significant. You are one who thinks it is significant. I don't.

I say f*ck that....128k is good enough for me. May have to download 192k+ vbr files on the inet though, but once I get 'em, I convert to 128k cbr.

Show me a program that can improve the "quality" of an mp3 and I'd be impressed. mp3 works by removing artifacts of the audio signal that are hard to distinguish by the human ear if they weren't removed. So if this program puts back stuff in the audio signal that were removed, it'd have to be based on a lot of educated guessing....if you call that quality.

If you really care about your mp3 sounding exactly how it should...look into lossless codecs like FLAC...or...just use the pcm wave format //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[WeDgE 10+ year member]

How many people actually bypass all that stuff?? Watt = watt doesn't mean amp = amp. Works great in a lab, but not so much in the real world.

And if you really want to get down to it....CD's aren't all that great SQ wise either. Majority of them are overly compressed in mixing/mastering, killing most of their dynamics.

All that I use on my amps is the gain knob...no use for anything else on them. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[bcarpenterfhl 10+ year member]

i most definitely agree with your comments about the amps. things like cooling could be added for an extremely cheap price. i think the ratio of money spent on amps to money spend on speakers is often out of balance.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

All that I use on my amps is the gain knob...no use for anything else on them. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Because you're special and have an H700 //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif But overall, I'd venture to say that greater than 90% of people use the amp's built-in features.

 

[Damaso87 10+ year member]

Isn't there a program you can use to increase the quality of mp3's as well? Anyways if we don't use mp3's how the hell are we supposed to get all our favorite songs on one cd?

No. No no and no.

Imagine bit rate(the numbers youre using) as a golf ball, say. The deeper and taller the dimples are, the more bitrate it has. If you grind the golf ball into a perfectly smooth round ball, youve decreased the quality. It is now impossible to add back the dimples, since you dont know where they were previously.

 

[HeatSeeker 10+ year member]

Ah thanks for clearing that up, I always wondered about that. Oh well I can barely tell the difference between the actual song on a CD, and a nice 192-320 kbps burned on a cd, especailly with the sound of the engine and all the other cars flying past me.

 

[desertheat 10+ year member]

Recorded at 128 vs 320 on my systems, I bet you a fresh $100 bill that I can tell the difference every time. But if I was in a moving car as most of listen to mp3's I would probably be hard pressed to tell the difference between 128 and 320.

As for the amp deal, yes it is known that with the same source input with both amps putting out the same rms power before clipping, internal amp settings off, both amps being able to play x rms and have no more of a +/- 1db variation between 20-20Khz.... that it is in all reality not possible to tell the difference between say a $50 profile or a $3000 mcintosh! It has been proven time and time again and there are still rewards for people that can tell the difference and I have never seen one of those rewards claimed. "This applied to class a/b amps" You guys might wanna find and buy a book called "audio reality" it is by a die hard audiophile, might change your views on things //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Now here is the catcher, why people spend money on nice amps is the following. Features of the amp which varies greatly. Looks of the amp. Warranty or customer service from the company they choose, How company x's amps stand up to time, heat, loads ect..., That companies track record with making good equipment or simply matching a high end amp to a high end install in a very nice car. I spent a decent amount of money on my current amps knowing you cannot audibly tell a difference between them and cheaper versions "now my amps are down in price so they kinda are cheaper versions" and knowing that it has been a fact for years. I Choose decent amps for the features, for the looks, for being able to link up to my headunit ect.. They had built in exactly what I needed and wanted, same with my new headunit

Last thing I can think of is choosing a high end amp is also a statement if who you are. I am more of an audiophile so the alpine amps I choose do not fit the bill in peoples minds for say compared to my home equipment, but if I had the funds to buy a nice mc4000m mcintosh you bet your pants I would run one, that would show people how I value my music and that I choose a company that is dedicated to audiophile grade equipment and PURE CUSTOMER SERVICE, hell I can send an amp in to mcintosh 8 years later and have it gone through and freshened up!! What other company does that?

Not sure if you or any of you will get my points here but there are different strokes for different folks //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

IMO a lot of it has to do with what speakers/etc you are using. Some speakers are more revealing than others.

 

[Damaso87 10+ year member]

Another issue is that when you download music, the bitrates may not be accurate. If the song is re-ripped

numerous times, the real bitrate significantly drops. (may not be true)

 

[`pr0digy 10+ year member]

The original poster brings up a very good point, at least the way I read the post. If your going to spend a lot of $$$ on expensive amps/subs/speakers, and then play .mp3's, there's a point where your wasting your money. So that $1000 amp, you say, has more clarity and nuance. Well, let me tell you, going from mp3 to wave will do much more than the jump from $200 to $1000 amp.

Also, it's a bit tiring of the bitrate argument. Sure, 320k mp3's are decent sounding, but, unlike what your ripping program says, they ARE NOT CD QUALITY! They sound fine, I personally use them, but it's not true cd quality.

 

[Raven 10+ year member]

For argument's sake, I can say I refuse to listen to MP3s on my system. Good "revealing" speakers or not, the difference is there.

The problem is, you have failed to mention WHERE mp3s lack, along with what encoding method is used to encode and play the MP3. In general, playing an MP3 of some rap song on $1200 in amps and subs with stock speakers is going to reveal little or anything different than the CD recording. The truth is, MP3 can't handle high frequencies, low ones are a breeze. The lower the bitrate of the MP3, the more you lose higher frequencies. Don't believe me? Listen to an 80kbps MP3, and explain why it sounds muffled, but can still retain decent bass. Those of us who argue against MP3 can simply hear higher frequencies. If can hear the high pitched whine of a television when it's on, you can probably point out an MP3 from a croud.

Certain encoding methods, like the one native to windows, can handle highs pretty good, but the general quality suffers instead (Max 56kbps).

You are all much better off ripping in OGG/Vorbis at 512kbps (generally 1/2 CD quality ratio) and then converting to WAV and burning instead. Since MP3s are converted to WAV for the actual burning of the CD, loss is as minimal as an MP3.

Also, if you're looking to swap music, low bitrate OGG is 1000% times better than low bitrate MP3. Food for thought.