Turning on VBR may help too. It lets the encoder use a higher bit rate during "difficult" sections of the music.
Greg
320 AAC is a waste. If you're going to go that crazy over audio quality... why not just use Apple Lossless or FLAC?
VBR would be useless in this case because 320 is the maximum possible bit rate that iTunes will use for encoding.
Sound: I DONT HEAR THE DIFERENCE!!!! I HEAR THE SAME THING! same clear and perfect sound like the cd! maybe technically have difference but the human hear can listen the difference??? I hear the same seriously! FLAC and Apple Lossless if for nerds! haha
thanks
HD space is getting cheeper and larger by the minute so why waste your time ripping to lossy when you could go ahead and use Apple Lossless from the get go.
In a nutshell what exactly is Apple Lossless?
Apple lossless, like a zip file, is compressed data where NOTHING is lost when uncompressed. When played back, the audio file sounds IDENTICAL to the original cd.
MP3 and AAC, on the other-hand, throw out data permanently that does effect the sound of the audio file. Thing is that Mp3 and AAC are designed to throw data out that supposably the human ear cant hear. They dont always get it right and some artifacts can be heard. The higher the bit rate, the less it will throw out, but still has a loss.
Great explanation! I read a lot about this and that resume all! so one thing that I think, if the Human Hear cant difference between by example a 320AAC vs a Original CD playing... why think a lot in which use? is better minus mb space, is like create by example: "a picture with 10 ten colors but the human eye just can see 2" or something like that... you understand my point?
thanks
hi there, I want rip my cd collection with itunes on aac on the high quality possible, so I think that most quality possible is this: (see the picture) right?
thanks
and the difference between flac and apple lossless? I prefer apple stuff...
The best quality is "losses". But manu people can't hear the difference between 256K ACC and lossless. To hear it you need both (1) Very good (expenive) equipment and (2) an educated listenier.
Both really are needed. What I found was that for most music the compressed formats were not bad but the 1% of it, that means short passages of all kinds of music (From Bjork to Clapton to classical to jaz) I hear can pretty noticeable "crunches" there AAC and MP3 failed badly. Some times it would be a percusion sound that was badly distorted or some sound of an eltronic keyboard that was whacked badly. But never the entire track I experimented with the setings and re-ripped but just could not find anything that worked 100% But then I was listening using a pair of large size head phone of a type commonly used by engineerrs in recording studios or on a large pair of old 1970's vintage Infinity speakers and I was listening carefully.
I had togo back and re-rip about 600 CDs to Apple lossless format. The sound now is bit for bit just like the CD (be that good or bad) and I'l never have to re-rip those CDs again. I can always convert lossless to AAC or whatever is inuse 15 years from now. Oh, and space is so cheap why care about space? I just bought a 1TB drive for $150.
On the other hand my 17 year old son uses blown out Apple earbuds and has very poorly ripped MP3 tracks and he does not care because he "can still hear it".
other interesting question to me, I have some SACD and the new SHM quality from japan... or the 5.1 if rip to Apple Lossless lose quality???
thanks