If I have loads of MP3s on a CDs, will they play off a Hi fi???

I think they do!

i don't see why not, although ive heard some particularly old cd players have a problem with them. if they don't try ripping them onto your computer and converting them to .wav then burning them again.......this is a kinda long way to go about it.

you could always just put them in your cd player, press play and see?

it does depend on the cd player, but a of modern ones won't have a problem, also I think some cd burning programs can burn them so that the old ones are OK anyway but I don't know details!!! try it and see!

I have made a couple of CDs using MP3s as the original audio source. It works so long as you burn the MP3s as an audio CD and not as a Data CD. Even though the MP3s are smaller in size to WAV files, the audio CD will still only be the standard 78 minutes or so as it is converted to CD Audio in the process in order for a CD player to play them.
Obviously you can get a lot more MP3s, in hours of music, when burnt onto Data disc if you dont need to play them on a CD player.

Gae

QUOTE (Gae @ Jan 13 2005, 10:53 PM)

I have made a couple of CDs using MP3s as the original audio source. It works so long as you burn the MP3s as an audio CD and not as a Data CD. Even though the MP3s are smaller in size to WAV files, the audio will still only be the standard 78 minutes or so as it is converted to CD Audio in the process in order for a CD player to play them. Obviously you can get a lot more MP3s, in hours of music, when burnt onto Data disc if you dont need to play them on a CD player. Gae

Rightio then. I'm just going to pretend I understood that!

Helen, I suppose it only sounds simple when you've done it before and you know what you are talking about!!
Welcome to the wonderful world of computers......

Gae

it helps if you think of .wav as being a 'standard' audio file format, where as mp3's are compressed.

basicaly a file is converted into mp3 by the audio being compared to the psychoacoustic model (think algorithms and stinky maths)....so in a .wav file there might be alot of data that the human ear cannot pick up on, but in an mp3 all that is cut out.

the mp3's (or mpeg layer 3) files don't work on old cd players because it is a relatively new file format. i think.

did any of that even make sense to anybody but my own twisted head?

QUOTE

basicaly a file is converted into mp3 by the audio being compared to the psychoacoustic model (think algorithms and stinky maths)....so in a .wav file there might be alot of data that the human ear cannot pick up on, but in an mp3 all that is cut out.

This time I'll pretend I understood that!!
Helen...Helen? Did you get that?

Gae

QUOTE (Gae @ Jan 13 2005, 11:21 PM)

QUOTE basicaly a file is converted into mp3 by the audio being compared to the psychoacoustic model (think algorithms and stinky maths)....so in a .wav file there might be alot of data that the human ear cannot pick up on, but in an mp3 all that is cut out. This time I'll pretend I understood that!!

hehehe!

I kind of did. I think. Ish. Maybe.

QUOTE

hehehe! I kind of did. I think. Ish. Maybe.

Sarah, you got that and you dont even know how to record on your computer??!!

I believe you!

Gae

lol, mostly because I don't have the necessary equipment, Gae, ie a mic and stuff!!!

As far as I understood it (and I *MAY* be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far out, it's SO possible!!) you take the wave file that has all the possible sound information in it, and via some clever mathematical stuff, you work out (or the program does!) what you actually NEED of that, what is actually heard, and takes out all the stuff that is fine detail which the human ear either doesn't hear or isn't going to notice is missing, and hey presto, much smaller file. like converting a bitmap into a jpeg, where huge big black spaces aren't accounted for pixel by pixel, if ya know what I mean. I can't pretend to understand HOW, but I *think* that is approximately the WHAT.

Anywhere close, oddy? I won't be mad if I'm waaaaaaaaaaaay out, I will be impressed if I am anywhere near close!!

QUOTE (oddy @ Jan 13 2005, 11:19 PM)

basicaly a file is converted into mp3 by the audio being compared to the psychoacoustic model (think algorithms and stinky maths)....so in a .wav file there might be alot of data that the human ear cannot pick up on, but in an mp3 all that is cut out.

If I might be excused a small correction there.

From the quote it should read "there might be a lot of data that most people's ears cannot pick up, and in an mp3 that is cut out."

I think if you look at the actual specifications, mp3 is referred to as a "near perfect" compression system.

It is not hi-fi and will depend on the ears of the listener. A moderately educated listener will spot the flaws on, for example, long crescendos and a few other things. With pop music it matters little as so much distortion and pre-compression (limiting) is added to get songs at what's called a "standard recording mezzoforte". .. So mp3 can hardly do any harm. There are some "classical" works that have defied mp3 almost altogether.

If you're into true sub-bass (infra-bass woofers) you'll notice it all right but not many people have rooms able to accommodate such.

Just so that no one depending on true hi-fi repro is under an illusion.

NICAM is actually superior sound and that's companded.
Hope that helps

Benjy Franklin

QUOTE

As far as I understood it (and I *MAY* be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far out, it's SO possible!!) you take the wave file that has all the possible sound information out, and via some clever mathematical stuff, you work out (or the program does!) what you actually NEED of that, what is actually heard, and takes out all the stuff that is fine detail which the human ear either doesn't hear or isn't going to notice is missing, and hey presto, much smaller file. like converting a bitmap into a jpeg. I can't pretend to understand HOW, but I *think* that is approximately the WHAT.

Sarah, and ALLof that is "compressed" into one word...."compression"!

Gae

The differences in quality between WAV and MP3 are obvious, mainly to do with the quality and dynamism between the two. When you need to send a piece of music over the Net or want to economize with computer space though, an MP3 is a fraction of the original size of the Wav file, therefore, the difference in quality is an accepatable one and MP3 compression is a wonderful thing in that respect.

Gae

QUOTE (Gae @ Jan 13 2005, 11:47 PM)

Sarah, and ALLof that is "compressed" into one word...."compression"! Gae

yeah but... I was right, right? I do have some clue??! lol...

and yep, you can definitely tell with a lot of songs (or I can!) even not classical, but certainly for classical. my bro listens to MP3 cds all the time, some of them are fine, some of them don't sound so good.

QUOTE (sarah-flute @ Jan 13 2005, 11:42 PM)

As far as I understood it (and I *MAY* be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far out, it's SO possible!!) you take the wave file that has all the possible sound information in it, and via some clever mathematical stuff, you work out (or the program does!) what you actually NEED of that, what is actually heard, and takes out all the stuff that is fine detail which the human ear either doesn't hear or isn't going to notice is missing, and hey presto, much smaller file. like converting a bitmap into a jpeg, where huge big black spaces aren't accounted for pixel by pixel, if ya know what I mean. I can't pretend to understand HOW, but I *think* that is approximately the WHAT. Anywhere close, oddy? I won't be mad if I'm waaaaaaaaaaaay out, I will be impressed if I am anywhere near close!!

There's one small catch, Sarah.

The big advantages of digital recording concerned editing and the ability to make exact further generation copies. Because you can copy bit-by-bit and your copy will be exactly the same.

You can go through 10 generations of copies and the 10th reproduces the first exactly.

But the moment you compress anything, be it a full CD to an mp3; or a bitmap to a jpg, you are discarding data. Fine just for making further copies. But if at any time you want to convert it back to a higher resolution format, you cannot recover the data you lost so the system has to make it up for you. (Frinstance, you might want to add an extra track or dub, or do some photoshop work on your jpg so it goes back to an inferior bitmap)

A couple of generations of that and you do start to notice the deterioration - it does sound as if you've noticed things...Oh ye lady of educated listening...!

mp3 is a boon when it doesnt matter, a sight faster to send as a file and if you're going to play it on computer speakers well....they also take a far bit away from the sound so you don't lose a lot.

Edited: I make this point as I'm sometimes asked to duplicate a few CDs to red-book standards (ie proper CD format) from mp3 originals and I have to do a bit of pointing out!

*nods* yepyep. I know the quality goes down. But please, was I close with my understanding???

I am learning a lot about this all here though, so please don't think I am complaining!!

QUOTE (sarah-flute @ Jan 14 2005, 12:13 AM)

*nods* yepyep. I know the quality goes down. But please, was I close with my understanding??? I am learning a lot about this all here though, so please don't think I am complaining!!

You described the process exactly, my dear. You have it to a tea.... (no sugar, mind)

But may I clear up one final teeny confusion?
You'll hear the word "compression" and also the word "companding/compansion"

"Companding" is a system where you compress the sound at the recording end. Then when the recording is played, a complementary system "expands" the sound back out (theoretically) to its original form.

The old Dolby B on tapes is just this. To make it work, the expanding process must exactly mirror the compressing one so the electronics have to be extremely accurate.

mp3 merely compresses data and not sound so it is strictly called an "encoding" process, not compression*.

Hope that isn't confusing but I'll try to explain another way if so.


* technically there's probably some kind of limiting so a user doesn't exceed the capabilities of the code and get all kinds of artefacts but that's another story.

QUOTE

QUOTE (sarah-flute @ Jan 14 2005, 12:13 AM) *nods* yepyep. I know the quality goes down. But please, was I close with my understanding??? I am learning a lot about this all here though, so please don't think I am complaining!! You described the process exactly, my dear. You have it to a tea.... (no sugar, mind)

lol... w00t!

QUOTE

Hope that isn't confusing but I'll try to explain another way if so.

ahhh... think so. well no more confusing than most things at 20 past midnight...

my god what have i started?

*gives sarah-flute gold star for understanding*

*gives rhapsodin small gold medal for detailed and educational explanations*

so, speed of sound=frequency*wavelength.....discuss *ducks for cover*

QUOTE

my god what have i started?

It's ALL your fault!!! ..............

QUOTE

*gives sarah-flute gold star for understanding*

For a second I read that as you giving me a gold flute.... now that WOULD be generous!

I do think that's probably enough technical stuff for one thread, though

lol yeh i think you're right

here you go, an imaginary gold flute that you can play in your head...

i'm such a nice person *hugs self*

wow! you're so generous! *gets all teary-eyed*

Oddy...
"clothes make the man, naked people have little or no influence in society"

Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh jeeeeezzzz!

My experience in the finance world tells me how true that is. The men are... empty images and...their suits. .. The personality depends on the make of suit. An Aq*ascr*tum suit has a far superior personality to a B... (better not mention names) one.

Take away their suits and they are nonentities.
To one boss I met... on dressdown days, casual dress meant 'an old suit'. Oh deary deary me....

LOL

QUOTE (Rhapsodin @ Jan 14 2005, 08:16 PM)

Oddy... "clothes make the man, naked people have little or no influence in society" Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh jeeeeezzzz! My experience in the finance world tells me how true that is. The men are... empty images and...their suits. .. The personality depends on the make of suit. An Aq*ascr*tum suit has a far superior personality to a B... (better not mention names) one. Take away their suits and they are nonentities. To one boss I met... on dressdown days, casual dress meant 'an old suit'. Oh deary deary me....

Ede and Ravenscroft. You don't do better