Are there any limitations in using MP3 or MP4 files

cokewithvanilla

yepimonfire wrote: »

no your right, all compressed audio files must be decompressed before they can be DACed (right not a word but shut it) the difference between MP3 and FLAC is that FLAC decompresses to the exact same as a wav file, MP3 does not as it is lossy.

So therefore the decompressed bitrate (the one that is actually played) is 1,411... or the same as the wave file. Correct?

yepimonfire

yes but that doesent mean its lossless lossy codecs decompress to the same bitrate, PCM is 705kbps per channel at 16 bits/ 44.1khz. all DACs can decode ONLY PCM, all formats MUST be decompressed first.

cnh

gim54pod wrote: »

I really hate to pop peoples bubbles but with computers,
a Kilo = 1024
kb = Kilobit, (8 bits make 1 byte)
KB = Kilobyte (1024 bytes or 8192 bits)

Just my 2 bits;) worth.

No problem with bubbles here. You are absolutely right...but the shorthand is from the Greek word ROOT which is Kilo and means 1000 generically (it is actually a misuse to use Kilo for 1024 but that's what happened in the computer industry...kilo everywhere else means 1000--Kilogram, Kilometer, etc.--only in the field of computers does it mean 1024) even if it is ACTUALLY 1024. We're fine.....binary calculations in multiples of 2 give you 1024--most junior High School students know this and so do I.

Just add some bytes...if you're disturbed by my 'error'? I am speaking in lay terms here. But I did punch Fortran cards in College spent some time with algorithms, reckoned problems in base 2, 8 and 12, and had a year and a half of Calculus....back in the dark ages before Apple and Windows interfaces?

Many thanks for the correction though..my error--of course, I'll be more careful in the future.

cnh

cnh

BlueFox wrote: »

No. Apple does not sell lossless files on iTunes. All files for sale are lossy.

I use Apple lossless for my iPod since I have a Wadia dock, which allows me to bypass the iPod $2.00 DAC. I use iTune software on my PC to copy the CD, and compress it into Apple lossless.

Apple lossless is a compression method to reduce the file size in order to save space. When the file is uncompressed it is bit for bit identical to the file on the CD. It gives an approximate 40-50% file size reduction compared to an uncompressed file. Think of it as allowing you to have twice as many songs stored in the same space.


Also, somebody above was thinking because an Apple lossless file size was close to an MP3 file size, the Apple lossless is the same as MP3.

That makes no sense. The file size is irrelevent. What matters is if all the bits are present and correct when the file is uncompressed. MP3 removes bits from the music. This information is lost, and can never be recovered. That is why it is a 'lossy' format.

Thanks to Bluefox and cokewithvanilla for the info about itunes. As I said, I don't buy music in Apple formats....so could not speak with any authority there. If this is true then yes....the file should approximate the actual CD file quite well.

cnh

yepimonfire

cnh wrote: »

No problem with bubbles here. You are absolutely right...but the shorthand is from the Greek word ROOT which is Kilo and means 1000 generically (it is actually a misuse to use Kilo for 1024 but that's what happened in the computer industry...kilo everywhere else means 1000--Kilogram, Kilometer, etc.--only in the field of computers does it mean 1024) even if it is ACTUALLY 1024. We're fine.....binary calculations in multiples of 2 give you 1024--most junior High School students know this and so do I.

Just add some bytes...if you're disturbed by my 'error'? I am speaking in lay terms here. But I did punch Fortran cards in College spent some time with algorithms, reckoned problems in base 2, 8 and 12, and had a year and a half of Calculus....back in the dark ages before Apple and Windows interfaces?

Many thanks for the correction though..my error--of course, I'll be more careful in the future.

cnh

this is because on 16 bit (dos style) 32 bit and 64 bit computers, all computation words must be a multiple of 8, therefore, 1 mb = 32 computations on a 32 bit program, the higher the bit depth of a command, the more complex a command can be.

cnh

yepimonfire wrote: »

this is because on 16 bit (dos style) 32 bit and 64 bit computers, all computation words must be a multiple of 8, therefore, 1 mb = 32 computations on a 32 bit program, the higher the bit depth of a command, the more complex a command can be.

Gotcha! I remember the early PCs having 8 bit processors. Man it seems like a century ago now? Wait, I guess it was..? 20th-21st century....lol

cnh

BlueFox

this is because on 16 bit (dos style) 32 bit and 64 bit computers, all computation words must be a multiple of 8, therefore, 1 mb = 32 computations on a 32 bit program, the higher the bit depth of a command, the more complex a command can be.

This is like many things on the Internet. A few correct words interspersed with nonsense. If one is really interested in this subject buy a book, or use Google. There is plenty of correct info on computers, current and old, available. Don't try and get a degree in Computer Science from Club Polk.

gimpod

cnh wrote: »

No problem with bubbles here. You are absolutely right...but the shorthand is from the Greek word ROOT which is Kilo and means 1000 generically (it is actually a misuse to use Kilo for 1024 but that's what happened in the computer industry...kilo everywhere else means 1000--Kilogram, Kilometer, etc.--only in the field of computers does it mean 1024) even if it is ACTUALLY 1024. We're fine.....binary calculations in multiples of 2 give you 1024--most junior High School students know this and so do I.

Just add some bytes...if you're disturbed by my 'error'? I am speaking in lay terms here. But I did punch Fortran cards in College spent some time with algorithms, reckoned problems in base 2, 8 and 12, and had a year and a half of Calculus....back in the dark ages before Apple and Windows interfaces?

Many thanks for the correction though..my error--of course, I'll be more careful in the future.

cnh

Sorry if i got under you skin i didn't mean to:o. Beside you have to respect anybody who has done programming on punch cards or paper tape, worse than programming in 1's and 0's.

Now back to the point of this thread. I wouldn't worry about it just use what ever format that sounds best to you because no mater what format you end up with there will be some processing done.

yepimonfire

BlueFox wrote: »

This is like many things on the Internet. A few correct words interspersed with nonsense. If one is really interested in this subject buy a book, or use Google. There is plenty of correct info on computers, current and old, available. Don't try and get a degree in Computer Science from Club Polk.

this is most certainly not nonsense, you dont think i have studied computer science and that i randomly grabbed this out of my butt?

reeltrouble1

waaaaaaaaa ok who is up for some Fortran?????

crap that was ages ago.

besides, their doing hi-rez now, if your downloading why not get hooked up to use it????

RT1

cokewithvanilla

gim54pod wrote: »

Now back to the point of this thread.

I totally agree. This really got derailed with all the nonsense about bits. No disrespect, but this isn't gonna help him make his computer setup sound better

>>>>He just needs to get the best quality audio he can get, use a digital signal, and possibly try to disable some of the processing that the OS does.<<<<

that might have summed up the thread

jinjuku

yepimonfire wrote: »

this is because on 16 bit (dos style) 32 bit and 64 bit computers, all computation words must be a multiple of 8, therefore, 1 mb = 32 computations on a 32 bit program, the higher the bit depth of a command, the more complex a command can be.

16/32/64 refers both to memory map and data/instruction registers available on the CPU.

For starters a 16bit cpu with a 16bit memory bus can access 2 to the power of 16 in terms of RAM or it can fill on 16bit register, execute the commands, flush the register and refill from memory. In theory you could have a 32bit value but it would take 2 cycles to process it and spit out the result.

If you had a hybrid CPU like the venerable Motorola 68000 (Amiga/Mac/Atari ST) it was a hybrid 16/32 bit chip. That is the internal registers were 32 bit with memory access being limited to 16 bit. So the CPU could hold/process 2 memory fetches (2*16). Later versions would go to a 32 bit bus for the memory bus.

This business with 1000K = 1MB is strictly in the realm of HD's.