RX-8 may VERY WELL have MP3 player :)
#3
It is hoped that it has an MP3 player, at least we wont have to be changing discs every 40 minutes. But does an MP3 produce the same quality of sound as a CD? I've heard that it does not, but am far from an expert myself.
Perhaps some input?
Thanks.
Perhaps some input?
Thanks.
#4
0-('.')-0
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think - once converted CDs produce 128 kbps. Mp3s on the other hand can go higher than 192 kbps.
More kb/s is a good thing = better sound quality.
Correct me if I'm wrong!!!
More kb/s is a good thing = better sound quality.
Correct me if I'm wrong!!!
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Immi
I think - once converted CDs produce 128 kbps. Mp3s on the other hand can go higher than 192 kbps...Correct me if I'm wrong!!!
I think - once converted CDs produce 128 kbps. Mp3s on the other hand can go higher than 192 kbps...Correct me if I'm wrong!!!
MP3s do not produce the same quality sound as a CD. Even MDs generally produce better quality sound than MP3s. Heck, I've had cassette players that outperform MP3s. The thing is, few people notice it. Some don't notice it due to the music they listen to. Some don't notice due to the quality of the particular stereo. Some people have the music on "in the background", where they won't notice the quality difference. It all depends on you and how you listen to music in different situations during the day.
---jps
#6
MP3s are compressed audio. CDs are not. The quality of the MP3 will depend on the quality of the compression and the original source, etc. A CD will always have better quality than a compressed MP3. However, in an automotive listening environment where you have road noise, wind noise, engine noise, other sounds, etc. the difference may be hard to tell.
I would NEVER use an MP3 in the high-end audio system I use at home. However, I would consider it for a car, if compressed at a high bitrate. The ability to put 100 songs on a single CD is very appealing.
I would NEVER use an MP3 in the high-end audio system I use at home. However, I would consider it for a car, if compressed at a high bitrate. The ability to put 100 songs on a single CD is very appealing.
#7
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey Sputnik, don't forget that the ol' 8-track has better sound quality (much higher fidelity) than casette tapes, 'cause of the wider width of the media... assuming of course that the 8track hadn't been chewed up... but new, they're better...
who's up for the ol' school technology?? can you dig??
who's up for the ol' school technology?? can you dig??
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
#8
Endangered Species
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In my own little world.
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw a european Mazda 6 yesterday and had a quick peek inside. It has a very similar stereo setup to the interior pics of the Rx-8 so you may well be correct about the Mp3 player.
#9
Certifiable car nut
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
hey Sputnik, don't forget that the ol' 8-track has better sound quality (much higher fidelity) than casette tapes, 'cause of the wider width of the media... assuming of course that the 8track hadn't been chewed up... but new, they're better...
who's up for the ol' school technology?? can you dig??
hey Sputnik, don't forget that the ol' 8-track has better sound quality (much higher fidelity) than casette tapes, 'cause of the wider width of the media... assuming of course that the 8track hadn't been chewed up... but new, they're better...
who's up for the ol' school technology?? can you dig??
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
#11
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London (England)
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a good encoder, MP3's encoded at 192K for example are VIRTUALLY indistinguishable from CD quality.
The compression is lossy... IE it throws away some of the data... and hence some of the sound... but it uses what is called psychoacoustic modeling to do this... Basically it works out what sounds will mask others so that those other sounds can be removed without it being apparent to the human ear.
Below 128K, the difference becomes noticeable, because it doesn't have enough bandwidth to properly encode the data it has, and the masking becomes obvious. By 192K, there is almost no noticeable difference even on a good home Hifi. I would take a 192K MP3 over MiniDisk any day!....
Remember, that at that rate, you can get about 6-7 full albums on a CD, so with a 6 disk changer you could put nearly 40 albums in.... I wouldn't go any lower than 128K to squeeze things on... below 112K is concidered not to be even FM quality... And get a good encoder, it SHOULD take a long time to rip/encode and if you're doing it in real time on a P200MMX then you're doing it wrong!
The compression is lossy... IE it throws away some of the data... and hence some of the sound... but it uses what is called psychoacoustic modeling to do this... Basically it works out what sounds will mask others so that those other sounds can be removed without it being apparent to the human ear.
Below 128K, the difference becomes noticeable, because it doesn't have enough bandwidth to properly encode the data it has, and the masking becomes obvious. By 192K, there is almost no noticeable difference even on a good home Hifi. I would take a 192K MP3 over MiniDisk any day!....
Remember, that at that rate, you can get about 6-7 full albums on a CD, so with a 6 disk changer you could put nearly 40 albums in.... I wouldn't go any lower than 128K to squeeze things on... below 112K is concidered not to be even FM quality... And get a good encoder, it SHOULD take a long time to rip/encode and if you're doing it in real time on a P200MMX then you're doing it wrong!
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakeech
hey Sputnik, don't forget that the ol' 8-track has better sound quality (much higher fidelity) than casette tapes, 'cause of the wider width of the media... assuming of course that the 8track hadn't been chewed up... but new, they're better...
hey Sputnik, don't forget that the ol' 8-track has better sound quality (much higher fidelity) than casette tapes, 'cause of the wider width of the media... assuming of course that the 8track hadn't been chewed up... but new, they're better...
---jps
#13
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London (England)
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Sputnik
What are you talking about? Do you know why they call it "8-track"?
---jps
What are you talking about? Do you know why they call it "8-track"?
---jps
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MP3
Hailz!
I put a Kenwood MP3 enabled Car Stereo in my Kia Ragtop, and matched it up with a Bazooka Sub. I ONLY use MP3 disks in it now. 10 hours per disk is just too great a deal to ignore. Any file encoded at 128 k/b or better sounds AS GOOD AS a regular Music CD _in_a_car_.
N8
I put a Kenwood MP3 enabled Car Stereo in my Kia Ragtop, and matched it up with a Bazooka Sub. I ONLY use MP3 disks in it now. 10 hours per disk is just too great a deal to ignore. Any file encoded at 128 k/b or better sounds AS GOOD AS a regular Music CD _in_a_car_.
N8
#15
mp3, cd, minidisk, dont matter, i got all the bases covered, cd's do have better quality, but its annoying to change all the time, my minidisc player holds 320 min at very low quality, but i hardly notice it unless i listen to it right after listening to my home system. In a car it really doesnt matter, too much road noise to notice especially if your going fast or have a window down.
#16
Actually, I think most people can't hear the difference between an MP3 an a CD because they are incompetent. It's kind of like the deal with DVD's now.
I can't believe that most people look at them and go "WOW that looks soooo good." Can they not see the decompression or the fact that it looks like a big Mpeg on their tv?
Give me a CD player for my music and a Laser Disk player for my movies any day.
I can't believe that most people look at them and go "WOW that looks soooo good." Can they not see the decompression or the fact that it looks like a big Mpeg on their tv?
Give me a CD player for my music and a Laser Disk player for my movies any day.
#18
Originally posted by CelticFan
Actually, I think most people can't hear the difference between an MP3 an a CD because they are incompetent. It's kind of like the deal with DVD's now.
I can't believe that most people look at them and go "WOW that looks soooo good." Can they not see the decompression or the fact that it looks like a big Mpeg on their tv?
Give me a CD player for my music and a Laser Disk player for my movies any day.
Actually, I think most people can't hear the difference between an MP3 an a CD because they are incompetent. It's kind of like the deal with DVD's now.
I can't believe that most people look at them and go "WOW that looks soooo good." Can they not see the decompression or the fact that it looks like a big Mpeg on their tv?
Give me a CD player for my music and a Laser Disk player for my movies any day.
If you want to see the decompression artifacts, you have to have a really crappy decoder, and/or a very large screen, or you can just blur the picture down to LD resolution and have them dissapear.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
garethleeds
Europe For Sale/Wanted
6
11-19-2015 06:32 AM
Chapsy
RX-8's For Sale/Wanted
1
09-22-2015 09:57 AM
Tsurugi
New Member Forum
0
09-07-2015 08:27 PM