Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 2, 2012, 09:55 PM   #251
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAT View Post
1249? What format? Mine is only 715 hrs, but fit in ~130GB, per iTunes. Mostly ALAC ripped myself, but ~100 hrs in mp3 for books that came that way.
1500 CDs, or just north of 300 MiB per CD on average. That's about 2:1 compression for lossless compression.

WMA lossless. For example:

Code:
W:\>dir "m:\Classical\Bach, Johann Sebastian\Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord), Pinnock"
 Volume in drive M is Shares
 Volume Serial Number is E870-97DF

 Directory of m:\Classical\Bach, Johann Sebastian\Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord), Pinnock

2012-02-04  11:47    <DIR>          .
2012-02-04  11:47    <DIR>          ..
2005-06-19  11:06        13,975,591 01_Aria_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        14,659,491 02_Variation 1_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        10,221,957 03_Variation 2_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         5,905,069 04_Variation 3_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         7,218,893 05_Variation 4_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        11,039,751 06_Variation 5_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        10,704,585 07_Variation 6_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         5,234,749 08_Variation 7_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        11,857,549 09_Variation 8_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         9,055,623 10_Variation 9_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        10,878,873 11_Variation 10_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        13,613,809 12_Variation 11_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        15,128,767 13_Variation 12_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        14,605,977 14_Variation 13_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        12,621,725 15_Variation 14_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        13,533,469 16_Variation 15_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        17,863,639 17_Variation 16_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         6,106,161 18_Variation 17_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         9,913,605 19_Variation 18_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         9,270,125 20_Variation 19_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        12,796,003 21_Variation 20_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        12,420,727 22_Variation 21_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         9,618,669 23_Variation 22_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        14,056,219 24_Variation 23_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         9,819,783 25_Variation 24_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        24,178,289 26_Variation 25_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        15,128,719 27_Variation 26_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         5,744,187 28_Variation 27_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         7,621,091 29_Variation 28_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05         8,264,583 30_Variation 29_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        14,619,291 31_Variation 30_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
2005-06-19  11:05        14,364,681 32_Aria da Capo_Trevor Pinnock_Goldberg Variations (Harpsichord).wma
              32 File(s)    372,041,650 bytes
               2 Dir(s)  705,220,206,592 bytes free
(Harpsichord doesn't compress that well...)
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 10:12 PM   #252
JAT
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Gotcha. Just figured it must be a different codec.
__________________
-- Spiky
JAT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 10:19 PM   #253
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAT View Post
Gotcha. Just figured it must be a different codec.
I thought that ALAC was typically considered to be about 2:1 as well - your numbers are closer to 4:1 compression.
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 10:48 PM   #254
knucklehead
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuckwithme247 View Post
Is it worth it to use these tools to rip CDs instead of with iTunes, or is it far too complicated? Anyone try this and notice much of a difference?
Mastering is out of your hands. For your case here, it is what is done to the recorded music before it is put onto the CDs.

If you want to be sure to get the music off the CD and on to your computer as accurately as possible, use XLD (search web) to ensure an accurate rip. It's easy, but you'll have to do a bit of research to familiarize yourself with what it is doing -- All those resources are available.

Ideally, devote enough disk space to rip to lossless.

If storage space is limited on your playback device and you want to fit a lot of your music on it, compress with AAC (or other preferred format) as needed. If sound quality is important to you, use ABX testing to determine your own personal sweet spot for compression settings.

Again, ideally you've ripped once accurately to lossless, and you can always easily change your portable playback compressed files as may be needed over time.
knucklehead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 10:58 PM   #255
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by knucklehead View Post
Again, ideally you've ripped once accurately to lossless, and you can always easily change your portable playback compressed files as may be needed over time.
...or, like I do, stick with lossless. Always.

Instead of smashing my library to horribly compressed crap, I bring it all on a USB 2.5" drive.
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2012, 11:23 PM   #256
knucklehead
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
I bring it all on a USB 2.5" drive.
.... attached to ???


Edited - Post needed extra question marks

Last edited by knucklehead; May 3, 2012 at 01:31 PM.
knucklehead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 05:19 AM   #257
stuckwithme247
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by knucklehead View Post
Mastering is out of your hands. For your case here, it is what is done to the recorded music before it is put onto the CDs.

If you want to be sure to get the music off the CD and on to your computer as accurately as possible, use XLD (search web) to ensure an accurate rip. It's easy, but you'll have to do a bit of research to familiarize yourself with what it is doing -- All those resources are available.

Ideally, devote enough disk space to rip to lossless.

If storage space is limited on your playback device and you want to fit a lot of your music on it, compress with AAC (or other preferred format) as needed. If sound quality is important to you, use ABX testing to determine your own personal sweet spot for compression settings.

Again, ideally you've ripped once accurately to lossless, and you can always easily change your portable playback compressed files as may be needed over time.
Interesting info, thanks. I was thinking you could take a mastered CD and then "master" it for iTunes somehow. I guess what you are implying is that to take real advantage of this utility the music has to be unmastered first...
stuckwithme247 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 05:20 AM   #258
canman4PM
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Kelowna BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
My 450 GiB is 1249 hours.

Almost all of your music must be 128Kbps to fit 1100 hours in 65GB....
Mostly. I had to fit it onto that iPod...

Nice thing about having the original "hard copies," is that I can re-rip as lossless when space permits in some future time.
canman4PM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 05:58 AM   #259
steve-p
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Newbury, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by canman4PM View Post
Mostly. I had to fit it onto that iPod...

Nice thing about having the original "hard copies," is that I can re-rip as lossless when space permits in some future time.
The nice thing about iTunes/iPod/iOS is that you can rip one time only as lossless, and still automatically use lower bitrate versions on portable devices.
steve-p is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 06:15 AM   #260
canman4PM
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Kelowna BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve-p View Post
The nice thing about iTunes/iPod/iOS is that you can rip one time only as lossless, and still automatically use lower bitrate versions on portable devices.
If you have enough room on your HD
canman4PM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 09:22 AM   #261
MagnusVonMagnum
In Time-Out
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
...or, like I do, stick with lossless. Always.
Sadly, iTunes doesn't offer dual-home/mobile storage and alac is just too large files for an iPod to carry much with you. Yeah, you can maintain two sets of libraries (royal PITA) or use that horrible automatic encode option which will take you all day to sync your iPod and I think it does 128kbps which is not good. Fortunately, 256kbps is audibly transparent, so I keep my CDs backed up in ALAC on another drive for archival purposes, but stick with 256kbps for actual library use. I've compared them and cannot hear any differences.

Quote:
Instead of smashing my library to horribly compressed crap, I bring it all on a USB 2.5" drive.
I think compressed 'crap' is a bit harsh given 256kbps is audibly transparent. I have yet to see anyone prove otherwise in a DBX test.
MagnusVonMagnum is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 11:47 AM   #262
knucklehead
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuckwithme247 View Post
Interesting info, thanks. I was thinking you could take a mastered CD and then "master" it for iTunes somehow. I guess what you are implying is that to take real advantage of this utility the music has to be unmastered first...
Well, you certainly modify the sound quite after ripping it from the CD. Wether you could actually improve it would I guess be a matter of taste. Things like dynamic range loss due to the "loudness war" are just gone for good.
No simple just plug in an make it sound better trick that I know of.
knucklehead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 01:12 PM   #263
JAT
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
I thought that ALAC was typically considered to be about 2:1 as well - your numbers are closer to 4:1 compression.
Well, it is a mix of codecs on my HDD, and I didn't really analyze details last night for posting. Maybe I have more mp3 than I think. My wife does have a lot of books.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnusVonMagnum View Post
Sadly, iTunes doesn't offer dual-home/mobile storage and alac is just too large files for an iPod to carry much with you. Yeah, you can maintain two sets of libraries (royal PITA) or use that horrible automatic encode option which will take you all day to sync your iPod and I think it does 128kbps which is not good. Fortunately, 256kbps is audibly transparent, so I keep my CDs backed up in ALAC on another drive for archival purposes, but stick with 256kbps for actual library use. I've compared them and cannot hear any differences.



I think compressed 'crap' is a bit harsh given 256kbps is audibly transparent. I have yet to see anyone prove otherwise in a DBX test.
Well, Aiden doesn't use iTunes. Also, the auto-reduce mode now offers 256, so does Match. Next time there's a rainy weekend, I'll probably look into putting all the ALAC back in circulation. I am currently using 256 versions for better compatibility right now. I'll have to weigh that against non-Apple devices we have, though.
__________________
-- Spiky
JAT is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 03:01 PM   #264
Frazzle
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by malnar View Post
Really think about that, though. Think about the AVERAGE user. They have to be made aware of this setting and many will want to know what the numbers mean/mean to them. Most people are very, very untechno-savvy. I think you are assuming way too much about people just because Apple happens to include these options.
I think you are assuming way too much yourself, and in a condescending way. Remember how Apple taught everyone that iTunes Plus was better than iTunes? Easy enough. Everyone got it: better quality, no DRM. Check. It would be almost too easy to sell this next step to 'true CD quality' in the iTunes store.

People have also been educated about 1080p enough to accept that this is the main USP for the new Apple TV. They see the extra options in the store for '1080p' video.

The lowest common denominator is not Apple's market. Never has been, never will be.
Frazzle is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 03:52 PM   #265
seinman
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Delaware
Quote:
Originally Posted by canman4PM View Post
I have around 1100 hours of music in my computer. Compressed, that's around 65GB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AidenShaw View Post
My 450 GiB is 1249 hours.

Almost all of your music must be 128Kbps to fit 1100 hours in 65GB....
I did some quick math here. canman4PM's average bitrate is 137k, so I'd assume that to mean most tracks at 128 and some higher. So yeah, AidenShaw's guess of 128k is pretty much right on the money. Meanwhile, AidenShaw's average bitrate works out to 839, so I'd assume that most (if not all) of those tracks are lossless files.

My collection, for comparison, is 46 GB for 199 hours. A much smaller collection than either of you, but my average bitrate works out to 538, which makes sense because about half of my collection is lossless and nearly half is 256k AAC.

The math to figure these things out is pretty simple. # of hours * 3600 to get number of seconds. # of GB * 8388608 to get number of kilobits (remember that bitrate is just that, not bytes, so basically it's GB * 1024 (to get MB) * 1024 (to get KB) * 8 (to get kilobits)). Then divide the second number (size) by the first number (seconds).
seinman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 07:29 PM   #266
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by seinman View Post
I did some quick math here. canman4PM's average bitrate is 137k, so I'd assume that to mean most tracks at 128 and some higher. So yeah, AidenShaw's guess of 128k is pretty much right on the money. Meanwhile, AidenShaw's average bitrate works out to 839, so I'd assume that most (if not all) of those tracks are lossless files.
The math is definitely a guess - especially since "GB" may be "GB" or "GiB", and "KB" can be "KB" or "Kb" or "KiB" or "Kib"....

And yes, my entire library is lossless rips from CD. I downloaded some legal MP3 files once, but they sounded like crap. They're now in the bitbucket in the sky.

I also don't use any portable music players. I listen at home in the office (Core i7 mini-tower) or on the HTPC 6.1 surround sound pulling the files off the server. On plane flights and hotel stays I have a 500 GB USB bus-powered drive and the laptop. My commute is short - so I listen to the radio and discover new music. (The Bay Area has some good FM stations....)
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2012, 11:40 PM   #267
bigwig
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
I suspect "alive" in this case means "dynamically compressed to zero".
bigwig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2012, 07:24 PM   #268
canman4PM
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Kelowna BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by seinman View Post
I did some quick math here. canman4PM's average bitrate is 137k, so I'd assume that to mean most tracks at 128 and some higher. So yeah, AidenShaw's guess of 128k is pretty much right on the money. Meanwhile, AidenShaw's average bitrate works out to 839, so I'd assume that most (if not all) of those tracks are lossless files.

My collection, for comparison, is 46 GB for 199 hours. A much smaller collection than either of you, but my average bitrate works out to 538, which makes sense because about half of my collection is lossless and nearly half is 256k AAC.

The math to figure these things out is pretty simple. # of hours * 3600 to get number of seconds. # of GB * 8388608 to get number of kilobits (remember that bitrate is just that, not bytes, so basically it's GB * 1024 (to get MB) * 1024 (to get KB) * 8 (to get kilobits)). Then divide the second number (size) by the first number (seconds).
Correct. The higher stuff was ripped using iTunes VBR set at "high quality - min 192k" setting. But I was in danger of blowing my iPod's capacity, so I dumbed 'er down. Now I've gone through my collection and pared it down to about 45GB of "must haves" for my iPhone 4S and only bring the iPod when I travel. If they bring out a hard drive iPod in the 250GB+ range, I will probably re-rip at a high VBR - or when iPhone capacity gets up there. Or if, before then, I have enough storage on my iMac (or more likely it's replacement) I will re-rip lossless and tick the "dumb it down for my iPod" selection in iTunes. My CD collection is stricly for home use. 128k files are fine for the car and airplanes - too noisy to take advantage of better quality rips. I think my next computer will be big enough to retire the CD's to a box in the basment and run the music from my Mac to my stereo sytem(s) but it'll be 10-20 years before a normal capacity computer is enough to do that for my entire movie collection. Without paying a retarded amount of money today for some kind of high-cap external storage solution, that is.
canman4PM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2012, 08:14 PM   #269
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by canman4PM View Post
Without paying a retarded amount of money today for some kind of high-cap external storage solution, that is.
Many mini-towers will support 10-20 TB of internal RAID-5 storage - but of course they won't run OSX without hacking.
__________________
6 October 2014 - the day that the debate about marriage equality ended. And equality prevailed.
nul
AidenShaw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2012, 08:41 PM   #270
MrNomNoms
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericinboston View Post
Me too...sell me a NON-APPLE PROPRIETARY LOSSLESS FORMAT (such as WAV, APE, FLAC) and I would buy hundreds of songs a year. I own 0 from iTunes. I have over 24,000 songs...all ripped from my cds that I purchase each week from Amazon below $10 a pop with free shipping and 0 tax.
You do realise that ALAC is open source:

http://alac.macosforge.org/

I do agree with you regarding lossless hence the reason I buy a fair amount of my music from the smaller indie outlets etc since they offer flac downloads - and because of that in return I buy a couple of the artists purchase to show my support
MrNomNoms is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2012, 11:08 AM   #271
tbrinkma
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by parish View Post
Sorry, I didn't make that very clear. I wasn't suggesting converting 128 up to 256 - I know that won't increase the quality - I've been thinking about re-ripping my CDs (the ones I still have) to lossless then converting them to 256 when syncing to my iPhone, but all the guides I've found online show 128 as the only bitrate. Seems though from another reply that there is now a choice
Ah, ok. My bad. There's been an option for as long as I remember. I know I picked 256 when I started ripping my tracks years back.
__________________
17" MBP (unibody), 2.66GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 750 GB HDD; iPhone 4s 64GB/Black
tbrinkma is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple volume change sound effect 2ms Community Discussion 1 Feb 15, 2014 11:53 PM
iTunes recent SD video quality improvements, and gaining DD 5.1 sound Dunk the Lunk Mac Applications and Mac App Store 0 Dec 12, 2013 01:07 PM
How to get the best sound quality from an Apple TV ? FrenchPB Apple TV and Home Theater 3 Nov 4, 2013 01:34 AM
Seeking sound effect/ music program for Mac/PC for Skipy AMW555 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 1 Aug 30, 2012 04:55 PM
iTunes Match sound quality jpetticrew iOS 6 9 Jun 19, 2012 11:11 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC