I am looking to pair a nice set of bookshelf speakers which I would be powering with a HK 3480. It is rated at 120 watts each channel. I am going to have a powered sub along with it so I will be looking for loud treble and nice mid bass.}
Ok well I mainly listen to rap music. The room is a pretty nice sized bedroom but there is also a lounge right off of it that I will be providing music for while people are in there. I want it to be able to get as loud as possible while still sounding good. I will either be playing the songs off my computer or Ipod. Hope This can help a little.
mp3 sound quality stinks, do some research JJ. Use Google and you will find all of the info that you need, I hope. Lossless with an ipod has much better potential.
MP3 files can sound reasonably good if sampled at a high rate (e.g. 384khz). However, the actual MP3 algorithm is actually the worst algorithm of its type. Pretty much any other lossy compression system developed after MP3 (ATRAC, AAC) is an improvement. FYI, MP3 was developed in the late eighties and become an ISO/IEC standard in 1991. As it was first on the scene it became the de facto standard in all digital devices apart from Sony's minidisc which uses ATRAC by default (far better sonically than MP3 but restricted to Minidisc AFAIK).
Apple's iPod can also decode MP3. The interesting thing is that Apple's AAC codec sounds better for a given sample rate. So 192khz AAC sounds a lot better than 192khz MP3. Not only that, but an MP3 file which is converted to AAC also sounds better on the iPod, although AAC from CD sounds better than a converted MP3 file. You could argue this is because the iPod favours AAC but I find it interesting that there is this discrepancy.
The fact is MP3 is 80's technology. New codecs are being developed. The latest one that has the broadcasters salivating is AAC+. This codec is intended for use in DAB broadcast in the future. Allegedly, AAC+ tracks recorded at very low sample rates (e.g. 64khz) compare favourably against much higher sample rated AAC tracks. This is important to broadcasters since it means less bandwidth is required and therefore more stations can be squeezed into a band.
JJ: While I can certainly respect that you have put a lot of effort into your setup, you are always going to be hamstrung by your choice of source and speaker placement. You can change the sound all you like with speakers, amplifiers, etc, but at the end of the day, to get your system to truly perform like it was meant to, these items will need to be rectified.
To the OP: Rap fortunately isn't a style of music which requires the greatest in high fidelity speakers (Ooo I can hear the drum machine whirring in the background!!!). Most halfway decent speakers will get fairly loud without major distortion, and the all important subwoofer will provide you with the bottom end. With that in mind, I would recommend you look at Klipsch, JBL, Athena, and Infinity for starters.
"mp3 sound quality stinks, do some research JJ. Use Google and you will find all of the info that you need, I hope. Lossless with an ipod has much better potential."
No cd player, no cds. I'll leave it there. How are people supposed to enjoy a wide variety of music when they cant afford it 'properly'. I have done research and I know about mp3s so dont pull the 'do some research' quote on me. Its a bit of a cliche comment which really annoys me. Sorry to sound angry.
But thanks Frank for the information. I may convert everything in itunes to aac 192 in that case then. I obviously cant rip from a cd to aac since I dont have any cds =(.
I sure hope mp3 is ridded of as the de facto standard. But to say mp3 sucks is something I object to, its still the standard, i'd argue it only sucks because theres better codecs which aren't used enough yet. I think a lot music in higher mp3 rates of 192+ and definately vbr rates are pretty good. I'd say anything below 192 is noticably poor however.
A question: in itunes, under 'importing' I chose custom setting and selected 192. The encoder is AAC. But should I change all the files to VBR? Will it be a good or bad thing to do?
Get a CD player and CDs. Not only are they better quality, they are legal, unlike downloading mp3s from Limewire and the like.
"How are people supposed to enjoy a wide variety of music when they cant afford it 'properly'."
Mix CDs? I'm not exactly a millionaire, but I still manage to buy CDs. Buy one or two a month, and you'll have a decent collection in no time at all. Heck, using your mp3s, you should at least have an idea of what artists you would want to invest in.
"I sure hope mp3 is ridded of as the de facto standard."
It is only the de-facto standard for file sharing networks where small file size is a plus; it is not the de-facto standard for audio quality.
"But to say mp3 sucks is something I object to, its still the standard, i'd argue it only sucks because theres better codecs which aren't used enough yet."
You certainly have the right to object. However, that doesn't change the fact that it will forever be blatantly inferior to CD quality, which is what most of us on this board will judge it by.
"How are people supposed to enjoy a wide variety of music when they cant afford it 'properly'."
The radio is free!!!
Sorry JJ if I offended you that was not my intention, however when you said that a lot of hard work and effort had gone into your setup. I was a bit surprised then that you listen to mp3 as a primary source. There appears to me to be an incongruence between the two. And ofcourse that is just my opinion...
I know what cds I'd buy. Theres just so many, it would cost thousands. I think part of my reason is since Im a student this accounts for this. And also that its convenient to have everything stored on my computer. I should have also said i hope the de facto standard for file sharing networks changes. That would be awesome. I'm not sure what affect it would have on the music industry though. Mix CDs as in compilations? I can't say they're any good, I used to buy Now cds when I was young but thats it. I know what music I like now as you'd expect.
Art dont worry about it. Just had a convo before about the whole mp3 topic, I think what annoys me most is the simple fact I want cds and a cd player but can't afford them. Therefore mp3s are my only option. None the less you can play mp3s on a standard stereo system from pcworld/dixons/currys (probs bestbuy, walmart in US)and it'll play but having good equipement is still going to have IMO a much larger impact on the sound quality as you'll hear more in the song and etc etc I suppose buying more classy equipement than I currently have would be a waste with mp3s being the limitation.
I suppose the 'audiophile' community vs the 'mainstream' community doesnt justify enough to reason for everyone to not use mp3s. On the other hand I think a lot of people can learn to appreciate what music can sound like from good equipment and formats. You just have to get them to understand..e.g. a friend of mine now comes to me for audio advice because he's heard previous headphones I've had and my system. It makes his generic 2.1 system seem like a toy.
I recall a customer coming into the shop with his iPod and asking about a fairly expensive amp and speakers (emmm.... Naim amp, B&W N805S, Dyn FOCUS 140 - that kind of thing). Eventually, it transpired that his iPod was his only source, that his MP3s were predominantly 128kbit, and that his CDs had been relegated to the loft. I calmly told him that he may as well save his cash and buy something a lot cheaper than he was considering because he wouldn't get the benefit.
He insisted so I gave him a demo of some stuff with his iPod and all of it sounded pretty awful to me. He wasn't particularly impressed either saying that he'd expected better.
I kind of gave him ... errr ... a piece of my mind, something about useless sources with dynamics compressed to hell and no resolution to speak of. I didn't exactly read him the riot act but left him in no doubt as to what I thought of his source, not because I wasn't ging to get a sale, not that kind of shop, more of a kind of 'I told you so' approach. Anyway 3 months later he walks back into the shop for a demo! At first I didn't recognise him, but during the demo I realised who it was - and this time he'd brought in some CDs. I asked what had happened to the iPod and he said it was 'crap' even though he had tried lossless compression etc. I don't think an iPod is that bad with lossless compression (very good actually), but this person had taken what I'd said to heart, gone home and tried his CDs again and realised how important the source was.
He's probably still searching for some HiFi but at least that demo went well.
MP3 will probably never go away because it is universally accepted as the common standard and there are millions of MP3 players which cannot support other codecs (the iPod is one of a few exceptions).
" I think what annoys me most is the simple fact I want cds and a cd player but can't afford them."
We all have to live within our means JJ. And it isn't like we all got our collections all at once. Like I said, start off slow; one or two CDs from a used CD store will set you back maybe $15. It will be a start. In ten years, you'll have a hundred CDs to enjoy, and you won't have to worry about us meanies on the forum bashing your system.
Great story Frank, I feel 'cleansed' in the same way only via this ecoustics forum. One thing I'll definately not be doing however is getting rid of my ipod-that'd be silly and I'd not have any portable music player.
That said I think I'll go along with you and Munzy in that I should perhaps buy my music on cds. I dont care really if they're second hand because if they work and in good condition I can easily rip them.
So during ripping, is AAC 192 the recommended format to use? And cbr or vbr-which do you use?
Note that I'll not be using a cd player as I cant afford- cds will be ripped onto my hard drive and eventually I hope to revamp my ipod collection with the new format.
