|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.181.127.24
Hello. After reading the comments, here is the questions: if you burn a cd with a MacBook in ITunes, then "upgrade it" with Lossless , are you getting a better sound, or not?
Also, are SACD better sounding than regular CD ? And last, are remastered CD`s, like Sticky Fingers, out June 9, better sounding? Can someone explain remastering CD`S?
Thank you kindly.
Regards.
Follow Ups:
"Upgrading a CD with lossless"
I assume you mean converting it to a file with a higher sampling rate. The answer is generally no, because you don't add any more information or detail by upsampling. Your DAC *might* have a better algorithm at the higher sampling rate, so even if you are not "upgrading" the information, I guess it's possible your DAC might do a better job at the higher sampling rate.
"SACD better than CD"
They can be, though I hear a slightly sweet, honey-like glaze on my Oppo 95. It's less gritty, maybe too much less gritty.
"remastered CDs"
Mastering is tricky, and any mastering engineer taking a 2nd (3rd, 4th…) crack at previously released material may do a better job than the original mastering engineer… or not. Put another way, there is no "correct" master. Mastering always involves taste and skill.
WW
"A man need merely light the filaments of his receiving set and the world's greatest artists will perform for him." Alfred N. Goldsmith, RCA, 1922
If you burn a cd with a MacBook in ITunes, then "upgrade it" with Lossless , are you getting a better sound, or not?
What do you mean by 'burn a CD'?
#1) Are you talking about 'ripping a CD'? In other words, do you own a commercial CD that you plan to 'rip' in iTunes so the music will reside on your Mac?
#2) Or, do you already have music on your Mac that you want to 'burn to CD'?
If it's scenario #1 you would rip the CD directly to Lossless to begin with. In iTunes Preferences > General > Import Settings, you would choose AIFF Encoder. You can also choose Apple Lossless which will save disk space and still produce excellent quality music files.
If it's scenario #2 you are not likely to improve the sound of the original file by converting it, especially if it's a lossy MP3 or AAC file, i.e. a music file bought from the iTunes store or other source like Amazon, etc.
Also, are SACD better sounding than regular CD ?
Most folks would say so but the biggest factor is how it's mastered or remastered. And Yes, there are several modern remasters that sound better to me than the old originals. And that IS the biggest factor in sound quality, not whether it is CD, SACD, or hi-res PCM or DSD.
what I meant was rippin a cd to my MacBook.
If I understand correctly, using AIFF encoder is better than Apple Lossless?
How do I , or is there a difference in quality in CD`s ? That might be a stupid question!
next level: are software programs , such as Amarra worth the investments, as far as HR audio files?
Thanks.fred.
AIFF is a uncompressed and lossless format.
Apple Lossless also known as ALAC uses compression but it's still lossless (comparable to FLAC).
By "lossless" we mean no bits are 'thrown out' like they are in MP3 or AAC. Once the bits are 'thrown out' for the sake of saving space, there is no way to recover them. Think of ALAC or FLAC like a ZIP file. The ZIP is compressed but when it's uncompressed no data is lost.
Compressed files like Apple Lossless (and FLAC) save disk space (about 50%) without compromising audio quality. That's the simple answer. Audiophiles will split hairs and some claim that the uncompressed files sound better. Try it for yourself but stay away from MP3 and AAC and other 'lossy' formats.
If you 'rip' a CD to Apple Lossless or AIFF you will retain all the quality that the CD offers. However, you cannot improve the quality of the original source, i.e. your CD in this case.
How do I , or is there a difference in quality in CD`s ? That might be a stupid question!
Listen to them, or read reviews in the case of remasters.
On the Mac you can use iTunes, Amarra, Audirvana, Pure Music, BitPerfect, HQPlayer, and a number of other players.
If you choose to use iTunes, some programs like Audirvana and Pure Music allow you to run in 'integrated mode'. That is, iTunes is used to manage your music library but the underlying Apple Core Audio subsystem is bypassed for better audio quality. Many of these players also offer various other features to improve audio quality including 'memory play' and automatically disabling unneeded operating system services.
I prefer Audirvana or Pure Music. I had lockup issues with BitPerfect. I presently use iTunes + Audirvana.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: