Go to Windows 7 Insider Guide
Digital music: Poll: What is your favorite audio format?
- 1/18/08 2:42 PM
Poll: What is your favorite audio format?
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) - 1/18/08 2:42 PM
What is your favorite audio format?
-- AAC (Why?)
-- ATRAC (Why?)
-- FLAC (Why?)
-- MP3 (Why?)
-- Ogg (Why?)
-- WAV (Why?)
-- WMA (Why?)
-- Other (What is it and why?)
-- I don't do digital music (Why not?)
Heres my view
by x.killeddestiny.x - 1/18/08 7:56 PM In reply to: Poll: What is your favorite audio format? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
MP3 is the best cuz its entirely universal
but ATRAC sounds the best when compressed farther however the little difference between it and WMA is excusable so therefor MP3 is the king of digital music no and ifs or buts
I don't...
by samusgravity - 1/19/08 9:39 AM In reply to: Heres my view by x.killeddestiny.xCare! Anything works for me. I do have alot of MP3s, because they work on my phone, computer, and iPod.
LOSSY FORMATS ARE ALL OBSOLETE
by audiofrog - 1/19/08 12:22 PM In reply to: Heres my view by x.killeddestiny.xMP3, AAC-Lossy, ATRAC and other formats that rob you of part of the recorded signal were introduced when download bandwidth and storage were at a premium. They made some sense as a valid compromise when lots of people still used modem or low-bandwidth connections to download and when PCs had 40 MB hard disks and portable players 516 MB of flash storage or 4 MB of HDD storage. Now, PC storage dirt cheap (you can add 500 GB for about $100) and portable players have up to 160 GB, while almost everybody has a broadband Internet connection.
So, at the user`s end, there is no more need for lossy compression: with lossless formats such as FLAC or Apples-Losless, you can stuff some 500 albums on an iPod Classic or 50 albums on a flash-equipped iPod Touch. Who needs more compressionÉ
Why are companies selling downloads still sticking with high lossy compressionÉ Because they are saving on server capacity, want to reassure the media industry that they are not actually distributing true CD-quality music that may be copied, and also because customers have not woken up to the new reality of cheap storage.
Result: a whole generation has never experienced the full quality of the music they listen to. They do care about sound, as sales of expensive ear-buds and headphones show, but they forget that the best playback equipment cannot cover-up the inferior sound resulting from truncation of the original signal.
Any sceptic can easily see the point by comparing a lossy download to a full WAV equivalent. Consumers should be vocal in demanding that companies selling downloads offer lossell formats. Remenmber that dowloads of individual tracks are priced about as high as the price of the same tracks on a full-quality CD. So why accept a compromise that only benefits the sellers of musicÉ
PATHETIC USA ISP MARKETING IS OBSOLETE
by Sonoita - 3/9/08 12:50 AM In reply to: LOSSY FORMATS ARE ALL OBSOLETE by audiofrog"...while almost everybody has a broadband Internet connection."
This is a continuing ridiculous myth. In the USA, high-speed internet penetration outside of urban areas remains at (generously) 25%. The USA remains far, far, far behind the rest of the tech-planet in terms of quality, pricing, and **availability** of high-speed internet access (see a March 2007 "Newsweek" article for details).
Until this basic disgrace is resolved, calls for esoteric lossless "standards" are just so much Pecksniffian elitism.
--Hawkster
Totally Agree
by Ivan Thomson - 3/27/08 6:47 PM In reply to: PATHETIC USA ISP MARKETING IS OBSOLETE by SonoitaI could not agree more. While in Scotland I received a amazing high speed connection (10+mb) for next to nothing in price. And if I paid up front the price was even less.
Here, back in the USA, my high speed connection is ok at best (and upload speed is total rubbish here) and costs an arm and a leg.
Geesh, for the country that invented the Internet we aren't doing very good.
MP3
by mgloege - 1/20/08 3:29 PM In reply to: Heres my view by x.killeddestiny.xMP#. Same reason most have. Its adequate for the vast majority of users, stable and universal. Question: - MP3 is generally thought of by most in the same way. Lots of other formats in the past (VCR tapes for example) finally settled down on one universal format. As if the others, at some point, read the handwriting on the wall and gracefully threw in the towel. Not in this case. Possibly some technical reasons for this? Or, is there still some vast amounts of money to still be made as purveyors of minority formats? I know one thing for sure. Computers are supposed to make things easier, right? Wading through all these formats just to play or work with my music is a headache I don't need!!
WRONG QUESTION?
by audiofrog - 1/21/08 12:16 AM In reply to: MP3 by mgloegeTo me, the question is not "Why not standardize?", but rather "Why not offer music players (PC-based or portable) with all the codecs neede to cover the various formats, with no need to transcode or install plug-ins?". The comparison with the Beta versus VHS bttle is not apt, as the two video formats required entirely different hardare and building a "universal" VCR capable of handling both was not feasible. In the case of digital music, the hardware side of playback is the same regrdless of file format, and it is entirely possible to make a univesal device by adding codecs. So why are most players limited to a few formats? Probably because compnies like Sony, Apple and Microsoft hoped to make customers captive of their respective proprietary formats (ATRAC, AAC,WMA). That did not succeed, except maybe for Apple, but remember that it tooks years before Sony, in a last-ditch effort to save its Minidisc technolgy, agreed to make Minidisce players MP-3 compatible...
Digital codecs
by fishandgrapes - 1/22/08 8:39 AM In reply to: Heres my view by x.killeddestiny.xWAV only please, and it still does not sound quite so transparent (on my mid-range gear) as analogue tape. Tested with live voice, piano, acoustic guitar and FM orchestral concerts. Whatever science may say, audio does not seem to like being taken to pieces. The last time I heard true hifi at home was via dear old BBC FM radio, in the south east UK, in 1970 before there was any digital deconstruction anywhere. It was on a par with a home recording made on a (borrowed) Nagra: about as good as it gets. As for MP3 - no comment!
mP3
by colonel2 - 4/7/08 9:56 PM In reply to: Heres my view by x.killeddestiny.xwell wav files are obviously better quality than mp3, but only slightly and 10x as big. For size and quality mp3 files are unmatched.
casino bonuses
Flac
by dpayer - 1/18/08 8:30 PM In reply to: Poll: What is your favorite audio format? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Even though it is lossless, there is still compression. It is the perfect codec for archiving.
danny
Whatever your favorite format is...
by pbuchta - 1/18/08 8:42 PM In reply to: Poll: What is your favorite audio format? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Make sure that you have a ripping utility or program that has a good codec. Some programs will 'rip' or transcode the CD format better others. I have used a number of PC an Mac programs that I can say, I achieved good results with. When judging formats make sure that you also have at least 2 or 3 different transcoding programs to compare. You may be surprised at quality of the same format using different programs.
Best,
Peter B.
Favorite Music Format
by nomadd74 - 1/18/08 9:50 PM In reply to: Whatever your favorite format is... by pbuchtaI don't know if this comment counts, but this week I purchased my first iMac desktop computer, and I am over the moon with it. I realise that in the USA you have many new wonders with music. However, I am not certain if this is available in Australia.
As I type this I am listening to a radio station in New York, playing a beethoven symphony, the sound is wonderful, so clear, just like being in the concert hall. I wasn't expecting such fairly good speakers on this iMac, so I am most satisfied. They are better than my old stereo set that is ten years old.
Although I am reasonably conversant with computers - I never knew about the way radio stations around the world are available for listening to, and with such clarity.
Only discovering this fact this week I have been listening to rap music from Panama, and operas from Chicago, thus I have become an instant fan - music whilst I type.
I do not understand what this style of reception is called and would appreciate any information?
Nomadd74
reply
by LMF5000 - 1/19/08 3:16 PM In reply to: Favorite Music Format by nomadd74erm, I believe you're referring to "internet radio"?
I guess...
by KazuyaDarklight - 3/3/08 5:37 PM In reply to: Favorite Music Format by nomadd74I say internet radio or more generically streaming(though this applies to video as well.)
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
