mp3 choice

[latestarter2 0]

Thinking of getting a Sony MEX 1GP for the car..mainly cos i like the idea of downloading the songs off the pc straight onto the headunit. (1Gb)

Anyone got one of these or know anyone who has and whether they are worth the £239???

Cheers

[latestarter2 0]

http://incarexpress.co.uk/view_product. ... tno=MEX1GP

 

heres the link

[Whitedog 0]

Saw this in the golf+ and thought it looked like an awesome idea. like the idea of getting rid of cds out the car.. keep it tidy.

[Trig 0]

Good idea but tis a shame it's only 1gig really.

 

The same thing with wifi and 20gig would be more like it :D

 

(...ooh a PC)

[Petros 0]

I thought about something like that a while back... but when I really thought about the question 'Can I be ars*d taking the the stereo out of the car* and hooking it up to the PC everytime I want some new tunes?' the only answer I could come up with was 'No'.

 

Instead I bought an MP3 CD player. Its only a single slot, so you still need some CDs in the car, but I keep about 10 discs in the glove box, and thats enough to hold all the driving tunes I'm likely to need. No cables, no extra software, no lugigng bits of the stereo about - just burn some MP3s or WMAs onto a disc and you're away.

 

Like Trig says, if it were WiFi and much more capacious, then I'd be sold too.

 

* I know it's not the whole head unit that you remove, but you get my point.

[Campaign 0]

I've got the Sony MEX-R5 which is a similar unit, but instead of 1Gb memory it is a DVD player, similar amount on money, and 4.7Gb of stuff into the bargain...

 

The only issue I have with it is it doesn't like low quality MP3s (which are typically used for Audio books)

 

Oh well, can't have everything. Now the one thing I AM looking for is a unit that will play either Monkey Audio or FLAC files so I can have LOSSLESS playback, for when 320kbps just isn't enough!...

[latestarter2 0]

Yeah i liked the idea of not having cd's all over the place really and this unit seemed quite a good idea..Next thing is get some 6x9's to make it sound good too.

 

 

Liked the links to the corrado ads and Top Gear!!! Had to laugh..kids bought me the Richard Hammond "what to Drive What not to Drive" and the inside the top two cars cars to have from the 80's and 90's apparently are the Corrado and the 205 1.6gti.. :)

 

Seems i'm not such a wally after all :lol:

 

All i need to do now is resurrect my Patterned wooly jumpers and Shell Suite and my kids will love me forever!!!!...wont they?? lol

[dr_mat 0]

I've got the Sony MEX-R5 which is a similar unit, but instead of 1Gb memory it is a DVD player, similar amount on money, and 4.7Gb of stuff into the bargain...

 

Oh well, can't have everything. Now the one thing I AM looking for is a unit that will play either Monkey Audio or FLAC files so I can have LOSSLESS playback, for when 320kbps just isn't enough!...

 

Nice idea. I'd like to see them include USB sockets on the things, so you can attach a USB hard drive, and it'll read the files off that. Also I'd like to see them support ALL bitrates and all variants of music file format (sick of digging through the instructions to find out if they support xKb VBR ogg or not - I mean it's the only playback format that has ZERO licensing cost, they should do it by default).

[Jim 1]

Whats the point of FLAC exactly? Why not just stick your normal music CD's in the auto changer?

[dr_mat 0]

At least with FLAC you get around 2:1 compression, so around 10 full-quality CD images on a single DVD.

But for in-car use, I agree, I don't personally see the point. A reasonable bitrate mp3/ogg is adequate for the noisy environment in a car, IMHO.

[Jim 1]

Ah - for some reason I was under the impression that FLAC didn't actually compress either so sort of defeated the point of going through the process of ripping and copying to another disc when just duping the CD directly would suffice!

 

I'm sure that 320kbps MP3 would be more than adequate for in the car unless you had a real audiophile quality setup in there!

[dr_mat 0]

I'm sure that 320kbps MP3 would be more than adequate for in the car unless you had a real audiophile quality setup in there!

 

I think variable bitrate has a bigger impact on the perceived quality of a file than the bitrate itself. IMHO a 128kb VBR file sounds better than 160kb fixed-bitrate ones. Ogg files are *all* VBR, so the encoder can choose when to use up the bits it has to make the best overall sound, and when to save them for later.

[dinkus 10]

Er well sort of, but even with a VBR MP3, the maximum bitrate that it can get up to is 320kbps, so no MP3 will sound better than a CBR 320kbps one.

 

Having said that, all MP3 encoders are not equal... so one encoder's 320kbps MP3 doesn't necessarily sound the same as another's.

[dr_mat 0]

I would disagree. A VBR 320kb mp3 will surely sound better than a CBR 320kb. ;)

And yes, of course encoder quality comes into it too.

[dinkus 10]

I would disagree. A VBR 320kb mp3 will surely sound better than a CBR 320kb. ;)

And yes, of course encoder quality comes into it too.

 

If it was possible to have a bitrate higher than 320kbps, yes. However, a VBR 320kbps MP3 has an upper limit of 320kbps, but can go lower if it deems it necessary.

[dr_mat 0]

Ah, I see your point. I assumed that it would be able to momentarily increase the bitrate over 320.

That's silly then.

And I guess that's why I use OGG...

[dinkus 10]

Yeah, sadly not.

 

MP3 is an ancient format and there are lots of other compression algorithms that work much better. The problem is compatability and what your current collection of files is encoded in. Ogg is certainly the closest contender to being a compatible format, but as everyone already has all their gear that will play MP3 and probably won't notice the increased quality you get...

 

(bear in mind here that a lot of people think 128k MP3 files sound fine...)

[dr_mat 0]

(bear in mind here that a lot of people think 128k MP3 files sound fine...)

 

Heh, there's always room for the mass market.. :)

 

What I dislike is when the mass market dictates the *maximum* quality that everyone is allowed. Such as when mp3-playback hardware won't play VBR, or won't use a bitrate > 160k, or when home digital TV came along .. yuck!

"Good enough" for some does not mean good enough for all!

[steve_16v 0]

A properly encoded mp3 is indistinguishable from a wav file for 99.9% of all people. All my ripped mp3s are encoded to the UberStandard specification and sound exactly like the cds they were ripped from (pc is hooked up to a good stereo). For me ogg vorbis whilst extremely good, doesn't have enough benefits over proper mp3s to justify replacing thousands of tunes, and then not having as much compatability with hardware playback.

 

If anyone wants to know how to create the absolute best quality mp3s possible look at this site http://www.chrismyden.com/bestmp3guide.php

[Campaign 0]

There is actually a 384kpbs MP3 format out there, (sometimes reffered to as MP3+), not very well supported, but a lot of players see the files as 320k files and drop the extra information.

 

Jim, unfortunately I AM an audiophile when it comes to the sound in-car, so it really does matter.

Steve, looks like I'm in the 0.1% then ...

 

VBR (Variable Bit Rate) by definition cannot be 320kbps, as it automatically loses some of the bitrate on certain parts of the files, it is UP TO 320kbps. A "extra quality" VBR can therefore never sound as good as a CBR (Constant Bit Rate) VBR's are useful for saving on disc space, but in these days of 500Gb SATA Hard Disk drives, and even 250Gb for less than £79 (inc VAT) what's the point. I encode most things in APE format these days, but have to make a second CBR 320 MP3 (Lame Encoder for information) for the car :(

 

APE format for those who don't know is actually called "Monkey Audio" and is similar to FLAC files, but is a bit better at compression (especially if you use EXTRA HIGH level of compression) though it takes slightly longer to encode. With APE files it also seems to be good at compressing MONO CDs better, which is kind of good.

[dr_mat 0]

All my ripped mp3s are encoded to the UberStandard specification and sound exactly like the cds they were ripped from (pc is hooked up to a good stereo).

 

"For you". I can tell you that no matter how much time I spend on mp3 (or ogg for that matter) it WILL NOT sound the same as a CD. The main reasons? Splashy, ill defined treble, and a complete absence of any low frequency information. (these encoders throw away everything below about 35 Hz - that's how it is.)

 

I promise ya, you can tell the difference. In fact, even playing FLAC on the same laptop as the OGGs/MP3s come out of shows a noticeable improvement in definition, and then of course playing the CD on a £300 CD player blows it out the water.

 

You are right in that most people can't tell the difference. Perhaps you are one of those people. But that doesn't mean they sound the same. Interestingly, you seem to imply that you realise OGG has more potential, yet you still go on to claim that MP3s sound exactly the same as CDs. This would seem on the surface to be a little inconsistent.

 

MP3/OGG and co are adequate for the convenience of instant access to my entire music collection for background noise, but if I really want to *listen* to something, it's gotta be the CD.

 

Looks like we're both in the 0.1% .. !

[dr_mat 0]

.. even 250Gb for less than £79 (inc VAT)

 

Funny you should mention that ..

 

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Quicklinx=3YLY

 

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Quicklinx=44FC

 

Less than £50 for 250GB now ... And the samsung one was down to £46.xx earlier this week. I bought one ... :)

[Campaign 0]

.. even 250Gb for less than £79 (inc VAT)

 

Funny you should mention that ..

 

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Quicklinx=3YLY

 

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Quicklinx=44FC

 

Less than £50 for 250GB now ... And the samsung one was down to £46.xx earlier this week. I bought one ... :)

 

Looking back over the last weeks mails from my suppliers, I realise I should've been talking about 320Gb for that price

 

I just need a bigger case and a power supply that will supply them whilst remaining a silent as a mouse... (got 1.08tb storage on the master computer so far)

[steve_16v 0]

You are right in that most people can't tell the difference. Perhaps you are one of those people. But that doesn't mean they sound the same. Interestingly, you seem to imply that you realise OGG has more potential, yet you still go on to claim that MP3s sound exactly the same as CDs. This would seem on the surface to be a little inconsistent.

 

Yes a properly ripped does sound exactly the same as a cd to my non-audiophile ears, also, I've not got top of the line audio equipment to listen out for the minor differences. I know from reading audio forums that OGG has more potential, but when I can't tell the difference between mp3 and wav format then there's no point changing.

 

VBR (Variable Bit Rate) by definition cannot be 320kbps, as it automatically loses some of the bitrate on certain parts of the files, it is UP TO 320kbps. A "extra quality" VBR can therefore never sound as good as a CBR (Constant Bit Rate) VBR's are useful for saving on disc space

 

Not true, CBR is effectively still VBR with an upper bitrate cap and padding whenever the bitrate falls below the requested bitrate. Only worthwile if your hardware can't play VBRs.

 

I encode most things in APE format these days, but have to make a second CBR 320 MP3 (Lame Encoder for information)

 

There are noticable differences in quality of mp3s depending on the version of LAME used and the settings, 3.90.3 (--alt-preset standard) and 3.97b2 (-V 2 --vbr-new) are the recommended versions and settings. If you can tell the difference between these and a cd whilst driving along you must have exceptional hearing or a poor mp3 player.

 

Interesting quote from Ubernet.

 

A lossy encoding is said to be "perceptually transparent" if there is no perceivable difference between the lossy version and the original, lossless version; i.e., it sounds or looks exactly the same as before and there is no perceivable degradation.

 

This is determined through repeated scientific ABX double-blind trials of test content believed to be representative of the majority of audio content, including many common samples thought to be trickier to encode. It's worth noting that the placebo effect is extremely significant in such trials, and it's important to eliminate such bias with proper double-blind testing methodologies such the ABX that HydrogenAudio prefers (and requires).

 

The ÜberStandard, by default, uses the APS profile — settings which yield perceptually transparent encodings for over 99% of all music, to over 99% of all listeners, on over 99% of all sound systems.

 

Generally, we recommend that if you are unsatisfied with the audio quality the ÜberStandard's APS profile provides, that either you have some kind of special technical problem plaguing your MP3 player that doesn't show up when you play WAV files (try a different audio player like foobar2000), or that you are probably fooling yourself — try a proper ABX test to determine if you can really hear a difference.

 

If for some reason you can hear a difference (which is unlikely, but possible), we suggest the FLAC profile as a possible alternative which provides truly mathematically-lossless encoding guaranteed to reproduce the audio perfectly, at the cost of much bigger files, more troublesome tools and a less supported audio format.

 

Not saying you're both imagining the differences, but that for just about everyone else on here mp3s are fine.

[16vradge 0]

Are you sure you guys actually drive Corrado's?? Or have you just got Corrado driving simulators on your PC's?

 

Nerds!! :lol: