[toobwacky]

I've downloaded a few songs from the iTunes store and think it's a great way to acquire music.  The thing is, I'm wondering how the sound quality compares to the CD versions.

So far, the best sounding track I've downloaded is Larry Carlton's "Night Sweats" from his Sapphire Blue album (great album BTW).  The clarity / transparency of this track is incredible.  It's got deep, taught, defined bass...  palpable, in-the-room presence in the mid-range and shimmering, sparkling highs.  All the instruments are clearly defined and differentiated from each other too.  This track sounds so good that it's hard to imagine that the CD version could sound any better.  

Before I go hog-wild and download all the music I've always wanted, I'd like to know how the sound quality of downloaded music compares to the CD version of the same music.

Has anyone done any direct comparisons?  What's your opinion?

TW

[audioengr]

I have done comparisons between AAC (apple compressed), Apple lossless, .wav @16/44.1, .wav @24/96 and MP3 using my new USB Off-Ramp USB to S/PDIF converter with Superclock2 and here are the results:

Best
1) 24/96 .wav
2) Apple Lossless (1/2 file size)
3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1
5) MP3 (1/10 file size)
Worst

Even the compressed AAC is more dynamic than 44.1.  It is a bit hollow-sounding on vocals compared to the uncompressed .wavs.

[ted_b]

Well, the downloaded iTunes Store music is 128kbps AAC, which is only slightly better (in my opinion) than 128kbps MP3.  My iPod and iTunes library is all in 224k AAC and is somewhat indistinguishable from WAV (cd) on a portable (but very much so on a home unit or a well-amped rig with a set of good headphones like Senn HD580's).  I spent quite a bit of time coming up with the 224 decision, a/b'ing with various combinations. So, although I've done no direct a/b'ing from the Store, the assmption is that 128kbps AAC will be clearly outdone by its CD counterpart, even on a portable.  The distinguishing characteristics are on the ends of the frequency chart (cymbals, deep bass) as well as overall harmonics.  

FWIW, my home ripped collection (up to about 500 cds so far) is FLAC, a lossless (like WAV) compression (unlike wav, saves me 50% disc space).  What I do is rip to wav, inport into iTunes with 224 AAC, then take the wav files and convert to flac in bulk (i.e about 20-30 cd's at a time).

ted_b

[Jon L]

I have done comparisons between AAC (apple compressed), Apple lossless, .wav @16/44.1, .wav @24/96 and MP3 using my new USB Off-Ramp USB to S/PDIF converter with Superclock2 and here are the results:

Best
1) 24/96 .wav
2) Apple Lossless (1/2 file size)
3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1
5) MP3 (1/10 file size)
Worst

Even the compressed AAC is more dynamic than 44.1.  It is a bit hollow-sounding on vocals compared to the uncompressed .wavs.

Steve, where does FLAC fit into this?  Since FLAC is "restored" to basically WAV before being converted, does it matter?

[audioengr]

I have done comparisons between AAC (apple compressed), Apple lossless, .wav @16/44.1, .wav @24/96 and MP3 using my new USB Off-Ramp USB to S/PDIF converter with Superclock2 and here are the results:

Best
1) 24/96 .wav
2) Apple Lossless (1/2 file size)
3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1
5) MP3 (1/10 file size)
Worst

Even the compressed AAC is more dynamic than 44.1.  It is a bit hollow-sounding on vocals compared to the uncompressed .wavs.

Steve, where does FLA ...

Have not tried it yet.  Do you have a link to a FLAC compression tool?

I would expect FLAC to be similar to Apple Lossless, but maybe not as good.  The Apple DSP seems to be quite good.

[ted_b]

"Not quite as good"?  Huh?  It's lossless.  

Although Apple Lossless is iPod compatible, FLAC is open-source and very pc friendly.  I chose it cuz it's quick, easy and pretty efficient (average of 45% HD savings over WAV).  It is a good archiving tool, as well, because it's open source and non-proprietary (read: future proof; if it goes away, I own the code; if something better comes along, great).  And pc players like Foobar can playback FLAC directly.   Nothing against Apple Lossless, it's good too.
Ted_B

[BradJudy]

I have done comparisons between AAC (apple compressed), Apple lossless, .wav @16/44.1, .wav @24/96 and MP3 using my new USB Off-Ramp USB to S/PDIF converter with Superclock2 and here are the results:

Best
1) 24/96 .wav
2) Apple Lossless (1/2 file size)
3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1
5) MP3 (1/10 file size)
Worst

Even the compressed AAC is more dynamic than 44.1.  It is a bit hollow-sounding on vocals compared to the uncompressed .wavs.

How did you make your MP3s?

[audioengr]

I have done comparisons between AAC (apple compressed), Apple lossless, .wav @16/44.1, .wav @24/96 and MP3 using my new USB Off-Ramp USB to S/PDIF converter with Superclock2 and here are the results:

Best
1) 24/96 .wav
2) Apple Lossless (1/2 file size)
3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1
5) MP3 (1/10 file size)
Worst

Even the compressed AAC is more dynamic than 44.1.  It is a bit hollow-sounding on vocals compared to the uncompressed .wavs.

How did you make your MP3s?

Easy CD Ripper - LAMEDII MP3 CODEC - 44100 128 setting

[BradJudy]

audioengr

I recommend you try the generally accepted best techniques for creating mp3s.  I can't say they will definitely make a difference, but that application does not let one leverage the better options of the LAME codec (and I'm not sure what they mean by LAMEDII).  

I would suggest using EAC or CDex for ripping and LAME with the --alt-preset CBR or similar setting.  Both EAC and CDex make it fairly simple to go this (EAC is the generally accepted standard, but I like CDex).  

As I said, it may not make a difference, but if it doesn't, then it adds credibility to your compairison as this is the generally accepted best technique for creating MP3s.  

Here are a couple of sites that discuss the process if you're interested:

http://www.bestmp3guide.com/

http://mp3.radified.com/

[eico1]

3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1

You may prefer a compressed format to uncompressed, but that certainly wouldn't be the more neutral sounding format. How is that?

steve

[Jon L]

Have not tried it yet.  Do you have a link to a FLAC compression tool?

I would expect FLAC to be similar to Apple Lossless, but maybe not as good.  The Apple DSP seems to be quite good.

FLAC can be download here

http://linux.tucows.com/preview/161611.html

If you could compare FLAC vs. Apple Lossless, that would be very helpful.  I do not want to go .wav if I don't have to.  Even my new 320 gig setup will run out of room some day

[audioengr]

3) AAC (1/10 file size)
4) .wav 16/44.1

You may prefer a compressed format to uncompressed, but that certainly wouldn't be the more neutral sounding format. How is that?

steve

I guess I just like the dynamic sound of the DSP better than the original recording as played.  It is probably not as accurate, but you need to hear it for yourself.  I found it quite impressive on a good system.

[Hantra]

Steve:

How are you doing 24/96?  Which DAC are you using for this comparison?

Thanks,

B

[tonygeno]

Have not tried it yet.  Do you have a link to a FLAC compression tool?

I would expect FLAC to be similar to Apple Lossless, but maybe not as good.  The Apple DSP seems to be quite good.

FLAC can be download here

http://linux.tucows.com/preview/161611.html

If you could compare FLAC vs. Apple Lossless, that would be very helpful.  I do not want to go .wav if I don't have to.  Even my new 320 gig setup will run out of room some day

I'll compare them: THEY'RE BOTH THE SAME. THEY'RE LOSSLESS, MEANING NO INFORMATION IS LOST AT ENCODING AND WHEN UNCOMPRESSED THEY ARE BIT PERFECT TO THE ORIGINAL WAVE.

I feel better now.

[Hantra]

I'll compare them: THEY'RE BOTH THE SAME. THEY'RE LOSSLESS, MEANING NO INFORMATION IS LOST AT ENCODING AND WHEN UNCOMPRESSED THEY ARE BIT PERFECT TO THE ORIGINAL WAVE.

I feel better now.

Makes perfect sense. . . OUTSIDE the world of audio.  

[Adarsh]

I've really been thinking of migrating to AAC after about 2 years of encoding (LAME MP3/Uberstandard)  music on my PC. Does someone know of a step-by-step guide of using it in conjunction with EAC?

Thanks,

-A