Topic: iTunes: standard practice for coding?

[poorlyconditioned]

I've just started playing with iTunes. I love the user interface.  Wow.  This program is slick.  My plan is to store a mixture of live and studio recordings for *listening only*.  Still archiving in WAV/FLAC.

I tried coding as MP3, 192kbps.  It sounds OK, I guess, but I'm wondering if I should be using a higher bitrate.  Also, do all MP3 encoders cut stuff off above 15 or 16k?  I've heard this, and iTunes certainly does, but I'm wondering if LAME, etc do as well.  I've heard people say the Apple codec is not that good.

Oh yeah, I'm running on Windows XP, so the itunes-lame thing on Mac is not an option for me.

Thanks for any pointers.
  Richard

[noahbickart]

I use apple lossless. I can hear the difference, and most who hear my modest system* agree.


-Noah


*itunes> macbook> optical> Coax converter> Tascam DA-20mkii> Passive pre> Marantz monoblocks> JMLab cobalt monitors

[poorlyconditioned]

I use apple lossless. I can hear the difference, and most who hear my modest system* agree.


-Noah


*itunes> macbook> optical> Coax converter> Tascam DA-20mkii> Passive pre> Marantz monoblocks> JMLab cobalt monitors

Thanks.

Hey, I've got another question.  Suppose I rip a CD with a higher compression rate (like lossless ).  Does the old one go away?

  Richard

[poorlyconditioned]

I use apple lossless. I can hear the difference, and most who hear my modest system* agree.


-Noah


*itunes> macbook> optical> Coax converter> Tascam DA-20mkii> Passive pre> Marantz monoblocks> JMLab cobalt monitors

Thanks.

Hey, I've got another question.  Suppose I rip a CD with a higher compression rate (like lossless ).  Does the old one go away?

  Richard

Oops.  Just found out "replace existing" was offered.

Damn, I love this software!

 Richard

[Gordon]

I hate itunes but that's just my opinion.   if you are gonna rip mp3's do it at 320kbs.

[poorlyconditioned]

I hate itunes but that's just my opinion.   if you are gonna rip mp3's do it at 320kbs.

OK, could you recommend some software for (easy) organization of tunes?

Maybe something else is good.  I just see a lot of other people using this one.  And it is free.

  Richard

[Will_S]

I like iTunes and do most of my listening through it.

The MP3 encoder iTunes uses is not very good.  However the AAC encoder is pretty good.  I find 192 kbps AAC satisfactory for ~90% of my listening.  At least comparing the iTunes encoders, AAC definitely beats MP3 at a fixed bit rate.

[keytohwy]

I'll second that.  Why use MP3, which is getting to be old technology. When AAC is available and better sounding.  I do everything in AAC 192 and it serves most of my purposes.

I also like the iTunes interface.  Smartplaylists rock.  I know other people like to "create their own folder systems" but to quickly find all of my Clapton tunes recorded before 1980 that are rated 3 stars and above and haven't been played in over a month, nothing beats it.  In fact, I can find that stuff and create a playlist quicker than it took me to type this.  That rocks!

Keytohwy

I like iTunes and do most of my listening through it.

The MP3 encoder iTunes uses is not very good.  However the AAC encoder is pretty good.  I find 192 kbps AAC satisfactory for ~90% of my listening.  At least comparing the iTunes encoders, AAC definitely beats MP3 at a fixed bit rate.