Mp3 means less bass?

Need help with your car stereo system? Have a technical question? Post here.
mrblack
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by mrblack »

Originally posted by Kirghiz
I'm sure it's a combination of snake oil, smoke, and mirrors, but I ran across this in my search for a processor. It's almost worth $40 and the time it takes to make a fresh backup of my library to find out what it is.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/iPod/iPho ... 966204.htm
You're exactly right, this is a load of BS. Do not ever add extra processing to your rips or you're losing the original quality of the sample forever. Once you start messing with level and dynamics the original is lost unless you re-rip the sample.

I use CDEx, an old but good CD audio extractor / MP3 ripping program that uses the net to compare the ripped sample to a catalog telling whether your sample matches what the database says it should. You can have tons of control over the speed of the rip so that it will work harder on some of your scuffed up CD's to make sure you get an exact sample. Sadly I have not found an M4A plugin for that program so I have to use DBPoweramp to do my lossless encoding for my iPhone. Either way, never never never trust iTunes to do your ripping, it will not be an original or even close to it, even if you're doing lossless!

As far as finding something that will make a good connection to your current setup, that is dependent on your head / processor and its input options. I know more recent higher end Alpine and Pioneer heads have iPod adapters you can use to make a bit perfect digital connection via USB. I used the Pure I-20 dock which has an optical output that connected to my processor, but that is not common in car audio so likely won't work for any of you. Works great with home setups too though!
Sony ES CDX-C90, XDP-4000X, XM-2000R, Phoenix Gold M44, MS2250, Infinity Beta 8-5-1
mrblack
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by mrblack »

Originally posted by ttocs
Insult? Not sure how you read that as insult as it was the furthest thing from it. Calm doan, stop taking this personal I am not attacking you we are debating SQ which like the taste in food is subj to the listener/eater. Not sure how my comment about how most people don't care about the sound output of the ipod compaired to the fashon statement it makes contradicts anything.
I think mr black is forgetting that most of here are not rocking an old sony explode 6 x 9s off of a Jensen deck.... The idea of getting a high end DAC t0 make my ipod sound better is just as funny as $200 headphones on them.
I think this is what I took as insulting.. it appeared that you were alluding to me being part of that Sony and Jensen group because of my stance on the topic at hand as well as the listed Sony head in my sig. I assure you my tastes in SQ are worlds above what most would consider normal, I fret over the tiniest of details in every situation. It also appeared that you were saying that I or anyone who would do something similar was wasting their time and money on using a digital media player as a jukebox for their system, which I found closed minded.
If you are happy with your system then great go play it and enjoy it but to say you can take a compressed format and by simply putting it through a different DAC and have it as good as the original, good for you. I am not sure how anyone can take something away in one process, and by simple changing the way it is formatted back to the way we listen too it somehow it regains everything that was lost, even though nothing was lost in a lossless format that just compresses the sound. To say you take a compressed format, take it out of the mp3 format and then convert it into optical, then again format it back to a amplifiable signal and never loose anything or ever gain any noise then you are dealing with some alien technology. I think even the staunchest audiophile will say that the more conversions/connections you have in the signal the more likely you are too get noise/artifacts.


You're right about some things in this paragraph. You cannot take a digital audio track and encode it to MP3 and then ever expect to get it back to 100% of its original quality. It is physically impossible to do this and any person or advertisement claiming to do so is just trying to mislead or sell something to you. However, it is possible to rip a digital track from a cd and maintain its bit perfect copy in a form other than CD audio. FLAC and M4A encoding make it possible to shrink the file size by about 50% and upon decoding the original 16bit, 44khz stereo audio track is streamed to the DAC in the exact form that it would have been had it been taken directly off of the disc, given you have the proper connection to your system to access the DAC directly.
I appreciate you sharing your experience in car audio. I too got my start in the early 90's first selling the gear and then working my way back to the install bay to continue my education.. I like have 1000s of songs at my fingertips when I am away from my car/home for the convenience but both my home/car gear was good enough that I could hear the difference. Call me part of the 1% I guess I will wear it with pride but to keep telling us/me that I can't/I won't/its impossible after all that we have discussed just isn't right. With everything we have discussed there are just more possibilities of noise getting into an mp3 signal so I will keep it simple, keep it clean and stick with my cd's when I can.
Sadly, I feel I will never be able to convince you that it's all in your head. You really might be right about being part of the 1% that won't do a proper analysis and actually give what I am saying a chance. I have a very particular ear myself, as should be evident by the equipment list in my sig. I have long strove for the best of the best when it comes to audio quality, I know what things make a big difference when it comes to car audio, and I also know what types of things make little to no difference. A properly encoded and played back MP3 would fall under the category of the latter.
Sony ES CDX-C90, XDP-4000X, XM-2000R, Phoenix Gold M44, MS2250, Infinity Beta 8-5-1
User avatar
PhuckinGood
Posts: 245
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 1:00 pm
Location: Bournemouth, England

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by PhuckinGood »

Blimey .. this has gone off in a few directions!

All I chipped in with initially was that I could hear quality differences from one cd to the next and had anyone else noticed, but after reading through the replies, I think the answer lies is the mastering more than the source.

Nice to learn something though, I never knew about the bad mastering compression flat loud stuff etc blah blah.. and that certainly answers a few things, as I notice the difference so much between my i-pod nana and cd in my car that I switch to cd if someone listens.

That said, its bloomin lovely having all this music easy to hand, not sure I could fit all the cd's in my boot!?

Carry on.... :arrow:
Alpine CDA-9886R
PG ZX250v1
PG ZX350v2
PG ZX450v1
PG Elite .65cs
PG QX 5.25
PG Ti12 sub x2
ttocs
the Floor Sweeping Hack with Golden Ears
Posts: 14785
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:53 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by ttocs »

OHHHHHHHHHHHH I see now man I was confused as I really wasn't taking a shot at you. I never noticed your sig and certainly would not throw the C90 into a bucket with the explode gear or Jensen by any means. Trust me when the gloves come off and shots are thrown you will not be wondering if I meant something cross..... :)

As I said above its all subj. My friend with his records listening to his analog signal(that was probably digitally recorded and played on a digital amplifier) makes him happy as a hog in shit so I don't care. I knew another guy that bought into every inch of any bit of audio snake oil I had ever heard of. When it was announced DVD's were being replaced with blue rays he came to work all excited about buying a $3500 DVD player that weekend. When I pointed out that he would probably be just as well off with a Betamax player since he was using an OLD CRT tv with the super video input. The next month he bought a $7k tv, and then paid $800 for a power cord for it. Crystal isolators on the floor, cryogenically frozen wire/cables, he spent a boatload on it and from what he told me had overpaid for almost all of it. BUT! I know he went home everynight and listened to the worlds best home stereo, at least in his mind it was and that was all that mattered.

Sound is subj too the listener and I can't tell you that mine absolutely sounds better then yours just like you can't do that too mine. Its all about the listener, not the equipment.....
what else can I say I am a grumpy asshole most of the time.
THUMP-LUMP
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:01 am

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by THUMP-LUMP »

What I wouldn't give to get my hands on the original, raw tracks from certain albums. I believe even I could come up with a better mix and mastering than what's out there. I have done some with my own stuff and think it would be fun.
mrblack
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by mrblack »

Originally posted by ttocs
Sound is subj too the listener and I can't tell you that mine absolutely sounds better then yours just like you can't do that too mine. Its all about the listener, not the equipment.....
Unfortunately I can say with a good amount of certainty which of our systems sounds better right now... Sold my old car last fall and haven't decided whether I'm going to tear up my nice shiny new car that has no place for an aftermarket deck in its current state. So for the past 9 months I've been rocking out to my 270 watts peak premium factory system... takes a whole lot of motivation to modify, sound dampen and wire an 8 way active system with a dead head, let me tell you... ugh
Sony ES CDX-C90, XDP-4000X, XM-2000R, Phoenix Gold M44, MS2250, Infinity Beta 8-5-1
mrblack
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by mrblack »

Originally posted by THUMP-LUMP
What I wouldn't give to get my hands on the original, raw tracks from certain albums. I believe even I could come up with a better mix and mastering than what's out there. I have done some with my own stuff and think it would be fun.
Agreed! I'm sure you'd be able to come up with a much more exciting and dynamic mix than the majority of these idiots doing the mastering right now!! Trent Reznor from NIN released some raw tracks of one of his web releases a few years ago if you want to toy with them, sounds like fun but never found the time to try myself.
Sony ES CDX-C90, XDP-4000X, XM-2000R, Phoenix Gold M44, MS2250, Infinity Beta 8-5-1
ttocs
the Floor Sweeping Hack with Golden Ears
Posts: 14785
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:53 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by ttocs »

mrblack wrote:
Originally posted by ttocs
Sound is subj too the listener and I can't tell you that mine absolutely sounds better then yours just like you can't do that too mine. Its all about the listener, not the equipment.....
Unfortunately I can say with a good amount of certainty which of our systems sounds better right now... Sold my old car last fall and haven't decided whether I'm going to tear up my nice shiny new car that has no place for an aftermarket deck in its current state. So for the past 9 months I've been rocking out to my 270 watts peak premium factory system... takes a whole lot of motivation to modify, sound dampen and wire an 8 way active system with a dead head, let me tell you... ugh
Yes I definitely have you beat. I currently have the stereo pulled out so I get too enjoy my loud pedal connected to a cammed 302 with side pipes and now electronic cut outs.



My loud pedal has a loud button and I have not missed the music much. Now we can discuss the irony of a audiophile quality system with that rumbling in the background but I hope to play over it with a elite .5 and an elite .2 playing 3 -10" subs and Ti9" 3 ways up front.
what else can I say I am a grumpy asshole most of the time.
THUMP-LUMP
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:01 am

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by THUMP-LUMP »

The Trent Reznor tracks were removed for download back on March 2012. Oh well. But it did get me looking at other places they may be. I hadn't been to the HomeRecording forums in awhile and found a forum labeled "Mix This". The premise is that people will upload tracks from their band and give other a chance to mix and master the tracks. I downloaded the tracks from the first thread that had them. I thought it would be fun to try and see what I come up with.

OK....here's a challenge. I'll post the links to the thread for the tracks and for some recording software (all free though you may need to sign up for the forum) and lets give this a try and see what we come up with. Though if anyone really wants to do this and compare final results, it would be better to start a new thread. This wouldn't cost a dime and, I believe, would be very educational for many. Here are the links....

For the tracks..... http://homerecording.com/bbs/general-di ... ks-359388/

Software......http://www.reaper.fm/download.php
Software......http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

Those are the two best software packages out there. I have played with both and prefer Reaper.

Given that this is more about mixing and mastering, I wouldn't get to wrapped up about the format.

Any takers?????? (don't be a wuss)
mrblack
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:47 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by mrblack »

Really awesome idea! I have the NIN tracks too if anyone is interested. Something like this takes a lot of time installing and testing, I fear I won't have much time this summer but would love to hear what you guys come up with! Great topic deserving of a new tread IMO!
Sony ES CDX-C90, XDP-4000X, XM-2000R, Phoenix Gold M44, MS2250, Infinity Beta 8-5-1
THUMP-LUMP
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:01 am

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by THUMP-LUMP »

I just loaded the raw tracks and played them back at unity gain. WOW! This WILL be a fun challenge.

Put your butt in that audio engineers chair and show us what you got.

I can help, to a degree, with Reaper. At least help you get the tracks into the software. Audacity should be similar.
THUMP-LUMP
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:01 am

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by THUMP-LUMP »

If you have the NIN tracks and they have a mastered reference (meaning they have put out the song) it would be a better route to go, I guess.

Yea....This would require something more than cheap desktop PC speakers. Though, it could be done with them.

This would be simply be a fun challenge. I'm sure no one here has the equipment required to take this seriously.

I'll take you up on the NIN tracks. If you want to email them to me, it's solo2racr at yahoo dot com
ttocs
the Floor Sweeping Hack with Golden Ears
Posts: 14785
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:53 pm

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by ttocs »

I would hope that a auto-remastering software would make it sound different/better and have no doubt that each of us could find one that would EQ it to a point we thought it was better then the original. But didn't we also just go around a couple of times of the problems with modern remastering?
what else can I say I am a grumpy asshole most of the time.
THUMP-LUMP
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:01 am

Re: Mp3 means less bass?

Post by THUMP-LUMP »

When I say "raw tracks" I am not referring to unmastered, premixed songs, but rather individual tracks from a particular song. As in guitar track, bass track, vocal track, kick track, toms track, etc. Just as the microphone recorded them. Add you EQ, compression, reverb, etc and mix it down to something listenable. Once to get a good mix, then apply an overall "touch" or mastering to the mix. The process of "mastering" a song is very subtle and doesn't take a whole lot of effects. If it does, you need to go back and remix.

The link I posted earlier to some tracks to mix are recorded pretty bad. Even for a garage band. The NIN tracks, I'm sure will be better quality and we should be able to find the finished studio product to compare to.
Post Reply