To kick start the BRAGGING RIGHTS !
This is my screenshot of total size:



please follow on using screenshots of your media folder

Edit: now i have changed it to a general chat session for audiophiles as i see not much contribution on the "bragging right" title base, instead a lot of discussion and chit-chatter

This post has been edited by noobandroid: Apr 13 2011, 10:48 PM

LOL all MP3 files?

1411kbps consider as FLAC?

A good start!

18.3 GB only. My music folder consists of 2101 files. Some files are picture files(for folder thumbnail) so can't say exactly how many out of those are actual music. used to be larger, but compressed some FLAC albums that I rarely listen to into 320kbps mp3 to save space. Luckily I still have the original CDs.

This post has been edited by tunertoobe: Apr 11 2011, 08:10 PM

....
What's there to brag about?
Who is the bigger pirate here?

lol.

shhh... slow2 a bit la... tats y i scared/don1 2 'show off'

hehehe...

Hmm...
What if we brag about CD collections?

Can showcase all your CDs here with pictures.

still stuck with these collections until now, i need new songs!

Someone answer my question please~

1411Kbps consider as standard Audio CD quality of 16bit 44.1kHz
And i think FLAC can have up to 1411Kbps quality.

1411Kbps = Data Rate/Bandwith (in kilobits)
Think of it as the speed at which digital audio is streamed over a network
2 channels (stereo audio) x 16 bits x 44.1 Khz = 1,411 Kbps (kilobits per second)
Actually its 1411.2 kbps (kilobits): 2 x 16 x 44.1= 1411.2

Let's continue our bragging... LOL

Cause I just happen to rip one of my CD collection and realised the details on it~
Sample rate - 44100Hz
Channels - 2
Bits per sample - 16
Bitrate - 1411kbps
Codec - PCM
Encoding - Lossless

Consider as FLAC? Or better than FLAC?

That's uncompressed. FLAC is the same thing, only compressed, kinda like ZIP file.
Supposedly(and logically) both should sound the same. Probably you need better hardware to decode FLAC properly, so that's why some people hear that the uncompressed audio sounds better.

FLAC is an audio format, a lossless audio codec. I read somewhere that bitrate doesn't matter when it comes to lossless?

Then how big is FLAC file size for normal 3 minute song?
I thought uncompress is always better than compress?


My detail also showed lossless~

Wah, so many!!
You think I should invest in an external hard disk to store my music? I'm thinking of CD hunting at the end of this month.
Do they last long at all? Not planning on plugging it in every time I wanna listen to music through laptop, just as a storage device.

This post has been edited by tunertoobe: Apr 11 2011, 09:22 PM

Usually around 30gb each file.

I hope it's typing error~

It depends on the song and how you rip it.

But if one song is 30GB I wonder how many songs can one have~
= =

Well, lossless is lossless. You're not losing anything when compressing data using lossless compression. They are slightly harder to decode though, depending on how compressed they are. The bit rate in FLAC doesn;t matter. The higher the complexity of the track, the higher the bit rate.

You mean 30 MB.

That's a typo.. or a successful attempt at sarcasm.

For me:

1st: CD
2nd: FLAC

Mp3 not much to brag. I skip it most of the time. Makes my speakers sound like sonicgear LOL.

Hopefully this thread wont be closed. Haha

---

Added on April 11, 2011, 9:33 pmHaha..... Cant believe someone didnt get it

Cheers

This post has been edited by anchovies93: Apr 11 2011, 09:33 PM

I need new collections.

Okay, since it's 30MB as expected, I think it's good enough for lossless files(at least for me )

Lol, don't think that someone would believe it either~

ME Me Me... I only have original CDs.
Even my ipod songs are from my CDs...

I am innocent. ^-^

.wav file brother..much better than .flac

if i'm not mistaken 1 file takes space around 70mb, right?

Don't condone pirate stuffs... If ripped from own Ori CD ok lor

This post has been edited by terradrive: Apr 11 2011, 09:56 PM

Yeah it's .wav file~
File size ranging from 28-40MB
Wow better huh~

Thx~

i also want to brag, but nothing much to brag about.
Here's my favourite CDs, i've seen people with Massive collection of CDs.

Me mostly listen Chinese Lady Vocal, some oldies.

LOL. It was a typo. I meant 30mb each file

Wow, that was one of a collection~
Reminds me of a forumer, Cosef collection of earphone, headphone, IEM, etc~

mm...22.9GB worth of mp3 vocaloid song collection

others didn't really bothered about XD

@TechMy nice collection, btw which one were you the other day in Jaben ? lol

High Quality Vocaloid Songs???
bro, where you staying? evil. Hehe...


i was there on last Friday night, i think you were there on Saturday.. so... hehe
btw, Jaben is a bad place to go. Full of Poison.
so, you bought anything there? can pm me for discussions.


@[G]ooD_DaY you listen chinese songs too??

some only high quality
most are 200-320kbps
others are just low quality... can't find any better

oh... Oster Project-Miku no Kanzume album is in lossless .ape

where do I stay? just look around my profile

This post has been edited by power911: Apr 11 2011, 11:30 PM

I am totally speechless so far, but later, I don't know ....

Yeah, but not the same u listen one~
I mean the type of song~

hmmm there was a similar thread b4.. end up closed cz all showing their downloaded collection..

until today i'm still having problem to differentiate a 128kbps and 320 kbps and FLAC which i ripped from my cd.
most of the time I just ripped them to 192kbps.
is it because my cd isn't audiophile quality ?

i'm just using my laptop > a normal usb dac > ms1i

and some on the table



pictures were from December 29, 2010 and needless to say my collection grows lol
sauce: http://www.quazacolt.com/personally-quazac...ts-room-update/

---

Added on April 12, 2011, 2:01 amthats why you show your damn CDs then wwwww

This post has been edited by Quazacolt: Apr 12 2011, 02:01 AM

@Quazacolt nice collection you have there. Huge collection indeed.
Your web does have more pics

But it's hard for me to admire your things as i am not so familiar with otaku & animation and Wow to your Pillow.
Anyway, got any good quality anime ost to intro??

Some of my CDs from the time when people still buy music...

This post has been edited by maknismudekots: Apr 12 2011, 02:41 AM

kpop love ... and some other genres not included in this pic

This post has been edited by Bonchi: Apr 12 2011, 04:50 AM

the Garden of sinners-劇場版「空の境界」音楽集-

All day erryday with mah K701 + Lyr.

thanks. and honestly too many good ost to name lol. for starters, anime shrine does have a OST/music thread, and awyongcarl recommended a good ost as well.

my recommendation for now would be gundam unicorn ost

I don't care much about getting the best these days.

If i want to listen to a particular track. I go on youtoob.

Which means my collection is potentially infinity.


Ya'll just lost.

to me, mediums (CDs/DVDs) only applies to my car audio and rare VCD/DVD obtained from anonymous (cannot be obtained from net)

most concert (live/unplugged) will be ripped and archived to my vault and the medium will be abandoned unless its original.

Haha

Infinity~

Lots of my album discs from late 80's to 90's are now rarities. I won't buy newly pressed ones for fear of sound degradation from master tapes. I look to Ebay for mint or near mint old pressings.
Just like comparing vintage Lp's to new remastered issues, world of difference and sometimes far from the original. I cringe at the asking prices when I see the same albums I have that are on sale at Ebay, but still good deals to be found, like last nite, an 80's RCA Japan pressed for US$1.90 exc shipping. More of a collector now than listener...LOL!

Collector huh~
Guess not my type~
Cause mostly I listen to songs based on feel, not really base on artist(maybe for some but not much really)

this is my humble collection




This is my 16 bit and 24 bit Flac collection.......bout 40% ripped from my CD collection.....any interested buyer??...

This post has been edited by Fusion: Apr 12 2011, 09:45 PM

Huh this kinda things can sell ah?
><

sure, black market stuff

hahaha....anything also can sell as long as there are buyers.....

by the way ....the selling part is just a joke....

Lol, cos I was wondering if I sell this out the buyer that buy from me can sell to others without losing anything~
><

You got the good stuff mate. Should invite some of the forumers for a listen. Its not all about the technology.

and btw, black market part is also a joke

Lol, but there is right?
For this kinda stuff?

pm me your list. if its good, why not?

they do, but not in black market for sure, maybe some kind of 'underground' place

congrats.

sadly my choice of songs does scarcely come in 24bit format.

that is to mention that quite a number of homebrew metal songs, demos, and chapters that are still in cassette tape formats.
some got remastered and even sung covered by modern bands but all the originals are lost. so sad mang.

Haha, not willing to sell my precious collections even if I can~

no, lossless is lossless. You lost nothing with it, this has proven mathematically. .wav is useful for archiving process if you're interested in recording process, not for casual listener because you can't use tagging on it.

---

Added on April 13, 2011, 2:46 pmDo you have Megadeth - Killing is My Business?

This post has been edited by Angel of Deth: Apr 13 2011, 02:46 PM

Anyone has any Muse CDs to let go?
EP, Single, album...........

This post has been edited by tunertoobe: Apr 13 2011, 07:29 PM

Bro, mind explaining about this part? The file I ripped out is .wav but why u said it is not useful for listening huh?

I think he meant that using .wav for casual listening isn't PRACTICAL. Players that reads tags wouldn't display things such as artist, album and song title. I tried, and although it seems that I can tag it, when played with Foobar2000, it still won't recognize the artist or album.

This post has been edited by tunertoobe: Apr 13 2011, 08:31 PM

Tagging means renaming the file?
If yes mine work after rename file and play with Foobar wor~

No no. It means a bit like putting all the info within the file. Renaming the file name is different, tagging it embeds it with stuff like the artist, album, album year, track no., etc. etc. I use AudioShell tag editor to tag my mp3s and FLACs after ripping them. Like giving a soldier his military necklace(that metal thing around their neck, which is their ID tag).

Play a WAV file in Foobar2000, and you'll see that it can't display artist and album name, it can only show you the file name.

This post has been edited by tunertoobe: Apr 13 2011, 08:47 PM

Tagging means putting the Artists, Year, Genre, Composer, Track number, Lyrics as well as other miscellaneous information on the file itself.

Oh, yeah it only show the file name~
U tag one by one ah?

That means only downside of .wav is cannot tag but quality better than FLAC??

Noted, thx~

Quality is not better than FLAC, lossless is lossless. It's like the different archive formats (e.g .rar, .zip )

Quality is the...
SAME
SAME
SAME
SAME
SAME
SAME
SAME
SAME
It's mathematically loseless. That means each little detail of the music is already in the file. Which = No difference in quality.

More info here :
http://www.ehow.com/facts_6142773_flac-vs_-wav.html
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/366271...ity-differences

i think i should rename this thread as "Audiophile Kopitiam", what do you people think?

audiophile for wannabees ....

This post has been edited by BCurve: Apr 13 2011, 10:25 PM

*Updated Thread Title*

lol

LOL kedai kopi. ipoh white coffee please)))

Got any audiophile kopitiam in Malaysia or not?
I mean kopitiam with awesome audio setup

Can drink coffee + enjoying hifi acoustic music.
Not Disco ar..

Place so noisy, how to enjoy laa

No...

I don't really want the mods to disable post count for this place. So can we try to keep 3 letter posts to the minimum? XD

might as well close this thread then

yes

i read some previous post saying lossless is all the same.. well.. mathematically speaking that is..

so how come lossy vinyls.. that even degrades (scratches when played).. sounds better than the so called lossless CD?

probably it can be proved by mathematics.. or not. but there's definitely some calculation or consideration being left out somewhere.
it would also fail to describe as well why all dacs that measures 20-20kHz at 0db signal doesnt sound the same also. perhaps we should do a math on how our ears hears zeros and ones?

Maybe some people do not want to listen to what their own ear hears?
if equipments are always correct.. we are all better off using hearing aids to replace our ears?

the point is, measurements and theories are always a guidelines.. the implementation is never going to be as ideal as any theories or measurements. what matters in the end is what the human perceives, and not what is being calculated.

(lets start teh flame wars! i made my point.. muehehehe)

How can you prove this? This is subjective opinion, it's may vary from person to person.

The fact remains that you're arguing against numbers and data, lossless is lossless. If like our previous discussion where you mentioned hardware, software, intermediary (recording/remastering/etc) differences I would understand that there's definitely some discrepancies. Some of the times vinyl would even beat remastered tracks outright. But does that mean that it is the end all for the issue?

If you're truly interested, why not organize a double-blind test involving vinyl vs digital recordings? I'll volunteer immediately. Similar to audio cable debates or high fidelity audio debates, it would go nowhere without a scientific approach. Other than your statement stating that vinyl beats all, or differences between Flac/wav/ape or even the Apple Lossless format. Otherwise the speaker companies are just throwing their money into water for doing double blind tests with their R&D isn't it?

This post has been edited by Yuki Ijuin: Apr 14 2011, 01:02 PM

because some distortions sounds nice. This is why tubes are often preferred.


You have to ask yourself whether you want accuracy or a certain preference in distortion. Distortion =/= accuracy. Merely preference.