Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Will MP3's take over CD's in the future?
It seems as though format MP3 is getting more popular amongst today's
generation with the advent of PC's, I-pods, etc. The big advantages are smaller files, more storage, size and portability. Will this make the CD obsolete someday? The average person loves the advantages of MP3's. They don't really care about the audio quality vs. the storage and portability. I'm dreading the day CD's become obsolete and MP3's become the main format for audio. Will this ever happen? Some people are still burning CD's. Eventually people may be burning MP3's onto CD's, memory sticks etc. Yikes! What's going to happen to the quality of the stuff we all record? Stan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... It seems as though format MP3 is getting more popular amongst today's generation with the advent of PC's, I-pods, etc. The big advantages are smaller files, more storage, size and portability. Will this make the CD obsolete someday? The average person loves the advantages of MP3's. They don't really care about the audio quality vs. the storage and portability. I do.........and I still buy albums. young whippersnappers Poly |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The limiting factor (pun intended) in the technical quality of music these days is not the CD, not even MP3 compression, its the damn dynamic range compression that is intentionally used to make it sound LOUD. A good recording with decent dynamic range reproduced via an MP3 at a reasonable bit rate sounds MUCH MUCH better compared to a recording that has had the dynamics squashed to kingdom come. I'll take a good recording on an MP3 over a squashed recording on a CD any day. Another bad trend is excessive dynamic range compression even during live performances. Mark |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
oups.com... It seems as though format MP3 is getting more popular amongst today's generation with the advent of PC's, I-pods, etc. The big advantages are smaller files, more storage, size and portability. Will this make the CD obsolete someday? The average person loves the advantages of MP3's. They don't really care about the audio quality vs. the storage and portability. I'm dreading the day CD's become obsolete and MP3's become the main format for audio. Will this ever happen? Some people are still burning CD's. Eventually people may be burning MP3's onto CD's, memory sticks etc. Yikes! What's going to happen to the quality of the stuff we all record? Stan The only reason MP3 came into existence was because of storage and transmission limitations of the current technology. We're practically at the point now where that will be irrelevant (meaning you'll be able to send true CD-quality and higher files in the blink of an eye). Once all gadgets catch up there'll be no need for data compression (other than the insatiable desire for humans to want more than all matter in the universe could provide). Of course the companies also want to push bigger and higher formats (so they can sell us the same bits they've already sold us at least twice already) so some compression may remain. But only if we bite. Just say no. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
as a peripheral issue, i would note that over the past several months,
our sales of digital downloads from itunes and napster have slowly started to catch up with sales of actual CDs. IMHO, it will not be very long now before we are making more money from MP3 DL sales than from CD sales. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
So are you saying CD's are on the way out? Is it a strong possibility?
Stan |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
That's what I was thinking. People are getting more of their music from
MP3 downloads. CD sales have been on a downward trend. If this is the case, hopefully the MP3 technology gets better. Stan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I'm dreading the day CD's become obsolete and MP3's become the main format for audio. Will this ever happen? Some people are still burning CD's. Eventually people may be burning MP3's onto CD's, memory sticks etc. Yikes! What's going to happen to the quality of the stuff we all record? Stan The young-uns don't know good sound if it knocked 'em on the head. I'm going the opposite direction by producing SACDs. 24/96 forever! -- Best Regards, Mark A. Weiss, P.E. www.mwcomms.com - |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
A good recording with decent dynamic range reproduced via an MP3 at a
reasonable bit rate sounds MUCH MUCH better compared to a recording that has had the dynamics squashed to kingdom come. I also do wedding videos, and the clients provide CDs for the soundtrack. Some of the CDs I ripped were horrendous. I thought something was wrong at first, because I was hearing classic intermod distortion when the beat/bass was causing everything to clip. Looking in a waveform editor, I could see about 12dB of peak clipping on this one CD. So it's gone beyond compression to out and out clipping and nobody cares. That is a scary trend! It means our art is dying. -- Best Regards, Mark A. Weiss, P.E. www.mwcomms.com - |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On 23 Jun 2005 14:38:34 -0700, "Mark" wrote:
A good recording with decent dynamic range reproduced via an MP3 at a reasonable bit rate sounds MUCH MUCH better compared to a recording that has had the dynamics squashed to kingdom come. Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Julian |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Wow, did I really use that many (I can't believe it) parenthetical
remarks? How annoying. I apologize. Mike |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Julian wrote in
: Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Let's qualify that. A good CD sounds better than a high bitrate MP3 assuming you have: 1) Undistorted source 2) Good speakers or headphones for playback 3) Quiet enough environment to hear the difference. In the world of iPods and music-on-the-go, CD has no advantages, and one major disadvantage--only 80 minutes per disk. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
In the world of iPods and music-on-the-go, CD has no advantages, and one
major disadvantage--only 80 minutes per disk. My take on it is that MP3 can be thought of as FM-radio-quality sound. Which is good enough for most practical purposes. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On 6/24/2005 1:51 AM, Julian wrote:
On 23 Jun 2005 14:38:34 -0700, "Mark" wrote: A good recording with decent dynamic range reproduced via an MP3 at a reasonable bit rate sounds MUCH MUCH better compared to a recording that has had the dynamics squashed to kingdom come. Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Julian Try listening to a dynamic symphony in MP3 format! But everyone is now listening to rap/hiphop that is no more than simple rhythm with bass on drums. So for this crap MP3 suffices. Count me out! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On 6/24/2005 8:43 AM, Carey Carlan wrote:
Julian wrote in : Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Let's qualify that. A good CD sounds better than a high bitrate MP3 assuming you have: 1) Undistorted source 2) Good speakers or headphones for playback 3) Quiet enough environment to hear the difference. In the world of iPods and music-on-the-go, CD has no advantages, and one major disadvantage--only 80 minutes per disk. And that's why I use FLAC at home and OGG on my portable. I have 400GB of FLAC on my music server so far, what is the 80 minute limit? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
les - i agree, especially considering that these young people are spending money on the insipid crap they play on radio these days... however, i did actually buy an album from iTunes recently that i could not find elsewhere - inside the taj mahal by paul horn - i got the album for $8.99, whereas it would have cost me something like $45 to get a real CD of it on ebay. (it is out of print) but again, i have to say, i dont think it will be ling before we are making more money from digital downloads from itunes and napster than we make from CD sales - it is a new world. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:43:48 GMT, Carey Carlan
wrote: Let's qualify that. A good CD sounds better than a high bitrate MP3 assuming you have: 1) Undistorted source 2) Good speakers or headphones for playback 3) Quiet enough environment to hear the difference. In the world of iPods and music-on-the-go, CD has no advantages, and one major disadvantage--only 80 minutes per disk. I have no argument with that. Julian |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:05:52 -0500, Dan wrote:
On 6/24/2005 1:51 AM, Julian wrote: Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Julian Try listening to a dynamic symphony in MP3 format! But everyone is now listening to rap/hiphop that is no more than simple rhythm with bass on drums. So for this crap MP3 suffices. Count me out! I don't get what you mean. Do you think I disagree? Or are you saying you agree with me? I said "quiet sounds" is one place where mp3 "looses definition". I meant anything that has lots of dynamic range which would include a symphony. Julian |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On 24 Jun 2005 05:41:46 -0700, "bsuhorndog"
wrote: I agree with some of the previous posters that compression (of the dynamic sort) is a much bigger threat to quality than that of the MPEG sort. I have heard some absolutely horrendous pumping in some radio tracks in recent months Lot's of people complain about this, but it is mostly due to the fact that the majority of radio engineers don't have a lot of studio or mixing experience and haven't well-developed ears. They hear their manager saying "loud is good", so they adjust it so the levels look great and don't have the ears to hear know what harm they are doing. Maybe people need to complain to the station more often. Believe me it is possible to process in such a way that helps you hear the radio over your road noise but doesn't make it sound objectionable. At least when I adjust the modulation processor it is! Julian |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Joe Kesselman wrote:
In the world of iPods and music-on-the-go, CD has no advantages, and one major disadvantage--only 80 minutes per disk. My take on it is that MP3 can be thought of as FM-radio-quality sound. MP3 is way better or FM radio quality is way better, depending on FM station. To get it really bad: store as mp3 on harddisk, put through zquesiomagrgahgweg processor and play back on clipped boombox, gets you the worst of all worlds .... Which is good enough for most practical purposes. I don't think it is about mp3 vs CD, it is about virtual media vs physical media, there is no sale of full wordlength audio because nobody tries. Enough people have enough internet bandwidth to make it a realistic option. Yes, it may be a fringe product, quality audio always was, but there is a big fringe out there with the planet as the market. Kind regards Peter Larsen -- ******************************************* * My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk * * The Vienna Copyright convention applies * ******************************************* |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Dan writes:
On 6/24/2005 1:51 AM, Julian wrote: On 23 Jun 2005 14:38:34 -0700, "Mark" wrote: A good recording with decent dynamic range reproduced via an MP3 at a reasonable bit rate sounds MUCH MUCH better compared to a recording that has had the dynamics squashed to kingdom come. Perhaps, but a good CD not squished sounds MUCH better than an MP3 made from the same master. That's the one place where I can definitely hear what mp3 is cutting out of the original sound. Reverb tails and quiet sounds loose definition. But since most like it loud these days, hardly anyone notices. Julian Try listening to a dynamic symphony in MP3 format! But everyone is now listening to rap/hiphop that is no more than simple rhythm with bass on drums. So for this crap MP3 suffices. Count me out! Well, BBC are releasing all the Beethoven symponies as MP3s so you can try them. The 6th will be available on the 28th I think. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/beethoven/ Yep, and the days following. -- Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd., +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda. West Australia 6076 comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked. EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Julian" wrote in message I don't get what you mean. Do you think I disagree? Or are you saying you agree with me? I said "quiet sounds" is one place where mp3 "looses definition". I meant anything that has lots of dynamic range which would include a symphony. The most noticable MP# ''giveaway' to me is delicate hf sounds with a masking louder sound ob=ver the top. The delicate bits usually end up sound as thru a flanger. geoff "Shorter of breath, and one day closer to death." |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Julian wrote: On 24 Jun 2005 05:41:46 -0700, "bsuhorndog" wrote: I agree with some of the previous posters that compression (of the dynamic sort) is a much bigger threat to quality than that of the MPEG sort. I have heard some absolutely horrendous pumping in some radio tracks in recent months Lot's of people complain about this, but it is mostly due to the fact that the majority of radio engineers don't have a lot of studio or mixing experience and haven't well-developed ears. They hear their manager saying "loud is good", so they adjust it so the levels look great and don't have the ears to hear know what harm they are doing. Maybe people need to complain to the station more often. Believe me it is possible to process in such a way that helps you hear the radio over your road noise but doesn't make it sound objectionable. At least when I adjust the modulation processor it is! Julian I'm talking about the CD iteslf. Yes its worse on the radio. And no, its not the fault of the CD as a medium, but rather the fault of the engineering or the producer. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
mp3s and tubes | Audio Opinions | |||
OPINIONS: Just How Good Are MP3's? | Car Audio | |||
An mp3 player that can play mp3s off dvds | Tech | |||
Making backups of mp3's and CD limitations | Tech | |||
Batch-encoding MP3s | Tech |