Originals vrs Copies

Its 'cos your speakers are bi wired!

Well, if you think MP3s sound like music then yes, you definitely need your ears syringing...

However, I had to (in sheer desperation) create a compilation using mainly Napster'd MP3s a couple of years back, and the transcoded CD (converted from the MP3s to standard PCM) sounded MUCH better than the MP3s themselves - I've no idea why

When the music's over turn out the lights

I must admit to making copys of a few of my favourite cd's using "Nero"to burn them and out of curiosity I gave the copies a spin on my Naim kit and was very supprised at the quality, I then did a back to back comparison and I thought that you would be hard pressed to tell any difference,"IF" there was one.
could be that ears are getting to old but Naim
don't service these items so there's little I can do about that. System used CDS ,52. ACTIVE 250 SBL'S So if there was any differance I would have though it would be shown up with a vengence.
Oldie

Hi guys,

I wouldn't say that copies sounded identical. Not at all. MP3 sounds ok. But it does rape the high end and low end.

Even so - I have a few discs I downloaded and burned to Disc from MP3 until such time as I get round to buying them (Alanis Morisette was the first! A surprise to me!) I don't mind the compressed music at all. it's very listenable but no competition from the original disc.

Incidentally - slightly off topic but I have to say - Napster on a 10Mbit uni connection started my passion with music. Had GBs of MP3s and now own most of the good albums I downloaded. Still working on the rest!

Andrew

diamonds - she'll pretty much have to...

You sad creatures! I don't own a single bit of Naim kit, and have a comparatively very modest system, but, burned MP3's & originals sound like night and day to me ..... admittedly, they sounded better than I thought they were going to [given the bad press that MP3 gets] but even high bitrate jobs are very dodgy. If you can't appreciate it, then maybe you should donate some of your equipment to me and get a mini-system. At the very least you should be investigating the possibilities of Minidisc.

throb

Hi Throb.
Idon't know about MP3's a bit to modern for me having just got the hand of this durnd computer thing, but surly all CD's are copys,
and if the kit that burns the image is of good quality the copy should be of the same quality or am I missing somthing here about digital information
Oldie

Am with throbnorth if you can't hear the difference why an earth are you spending so much on high end kit such as Naim.

MP3 is a compression system which means that all the original information is not present just that which the logorythm deems necessary. I can hear the difference quite clearly.

CDSII, 52, 135's and SF Electa Amator II's

Hi Davidr
I think you have missed the point, I said that I don't know about mp3's I don't have one
let alone know how to use one, but I have Naim kit as I want to get the best information out from whatever medium I use, be that vinyl,CD's
or copies.I always thought that digital to digital was suposed to be as near to perfect as you could get.but I'm still quite happy with my copies for my walkman,as it's quite difficult to get a fullblown Naim set up in amongst the
flowers

...MP3's are digital copies all right, but with many of the bits thrown away. How many depends on the level of compression.

FWIW, MP3s sound shite to me. Three Cheers for the syringe!

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

Ah well, it lets us feel all the more smug in our cosy world of indulgence doesn't it? They don't know what they're missing. Kids today. Put them in the services I say...

My 2p...

Had a quick recce of this thread & I think the original Q is not so much "is MP3 any good?" but "can a burned MP3 copy sound better than the original downloaded MP3 file?"

On that basis, the answer would have to depend on exactly what's being used to play them. I'm assuming the original downloaded MP3 was played straight from a PC Hard Disk, & also that for a vaguely fair comparison, the CDs are being played on the same PC, same speakers etc. Final assumption is that they're burnt as an MP3 & not converted to WAV or some other format...

This leaves two variables:
1. Is there anything in the Reading & Burning process that changes the perceived recorded sound?
2. Are there any significant differences in replay performance (Jitter etc) from the PC's CD drive & its Hard disk.

Based on the principle that nothing's perfect (even a digital copy!!! shock horror...), I'd say that step 1 can only degrade the sound, or at best not improve it.

As for No. 2 though I'm not so sure. The CD format was initially designed for music replay, & the Hard disk for data. The key difference here is that Jitter (timing errors on replay) is more significant an issue in music replay than data, so maybe even the lowly PC CD drive incorporates technologies to minimise Jitter that are absent from the hard disk, so improve the perceived sound beyond any degradation caused by No. 1.

Anyone know better?

J

PS - before anyone jumps on me, I'm aware that Jitter is a complex subject & claim no profound understanding of it, just a general awareness that a) it's a bad thing, & b) it affects timing (which I guess Naimies would be arguably more aware of than most), so if I'm wrong please be gentle with me

the music im talking about was mp3 format converted to wav using nero.so as a layman it is a standard cd please tell me if if wrong.and the other reason is the vast amount available to me very very cheap through a lovely source.and the music is spun through my main hi-fi setup not my pc
cheers all.

Keithy

yes my speakers are bi wired
with 2 seperate runs of nac5
why does this make a difference?

just another little one
i have a sacd pressing of dire straights hits,and this is without doubt the best cd in my collection there seems to be so much more depth and clarity compared to all the others
(my marantz cd63 ki sig is not sacd compatable)
but it does dig deep on this cd.
ps.although dire straights are good they are not my favourite band!dont know why i had to make this clear just felt i had to.
cheers
paul.

MP3 is a bandwidth-oriented format. That means, the smaller the bandwidth, the harder the compression.

The german computer magazine "C'T" did a poll last year doing exactly what BellyHibee did: they took MP3s of various bandwidths (starting at 128kbit/s, going up to 360kBit/s) and converted them to WAVs. The readers could now download them and burn them on a CD. The readers did not know the quality of the WAVs, only the file's name. The same was done at the editorial office and a selected jury did a double blind test.

The results were interesting. IIRC up to 192kBit/s the majority could spot a difference (obviously depending on their hifi equipment), but around 256kBit/s things got really tough

Before you start bashing me, I'm a vinyl junkie myself. But this poll made me somewhat more tolerant towards digital formats.

Naim amplifiers don't like being bi-wired

easy enough to try reverting to single wire?

strongly recommend you at least try it

I done comparisons of MP3 at different bit rates (upto 320k) with a direct feed from my PC, then also with a MP3 expanded to WAV CDR through my main system.

Frankly, both were rubbish, as was the minidisk comparison I've also tried.

Still, I also think that CDRs don't sound as good as the original pressing, but we can save that for another debate.

Personally I think the only use for minidisk/mp3 is on the move, where the audio environment is so poor, that you can't tell how bad the recording is.

I can't say that I have bothered downloading MP3s yet.

I am on 1 gig broadband and have played around in Lime wire, but 9 times out of 10 it won't download it so I kind of gave up.

As for burned CDs, well to me they sound identical. Although if I play a CD in the mac, then play the same music direct from the drive, it does indeed sound different. I don't know if this has anything to do with access speed, or the way its reading the information. The only real difference there is straight from harddrive it sounds a little wolly.

SO I would be interested to hear one of this new fangled Linn et all harddrive player things.

One gig broadband?

Jeez! Think how much pr0n you can download at that speed!

Must be a multi-millionaire to afford a one gig link! Obviously I think you mean 1 meg!

As to the topic, the sound card makes a helluva lot of difference, I have a high end soundblaster which plays mp3's well but that all depends on the bitrate.

Also, conversion from mp3 back to raw CD format only sounds as good as the mp3 and you can tell the difference between that and the original CD easily enough.

On the move I use a Sony MP3 CD walkman with everything recorded at 192kbit VBR which is good enough.

Opps, sorry yes that is what I meant!

quote:

---

Originally posted by keithy:
Naim amplifiers don't like being bi-wired

easy enough to try reverting to single wire?

strongly recommend you at least try it

---

I did and i think it sounds better bi-wired could just be a personal thing but i feel it has a deeper soundstage.

There is no reason why that would be the case Belly.