SWEEEEEEET been looking for some hardcore Destiny's Child or DIDO CDs. Very useful as mug coasters.

Are you for real!

NEWSFLASH

ITEM IS £1 AT POUNDLAND.

Reports also coming in that a bear is having a doo doo in the woods.

More on this at 10.

You'll be telling us next that you can take better pictures on a mobile phone than on a professional camera.

'CDs'?? How very last decade.

how about dvds ?

Items for £1 at Poundland ? Preposterous...

Actually starts tomorrow

SWEEEEEEET been looking for some hardcore Destiny's Child or DIDO CDs. Very useful as mug coasters.

Excellent find op, heat added

People who don't have the right equipment think MP3 IS da business!

It's all about lossless audio! If you really enjoy music; LPs and CDs is what it's very much about!

NEWSFLASH

ITEM IS £1 AT POUNDLAND.

Reports also coming in that a bear is having a doo doo in the woods.

More on this at 10.

A doo doo? Does your mummy know you are up early? :smiley:

I defy you to reliably detect a difference in audio quality between 320kbps mp3, aac, ogg vorbis etc, and 1411kbps PCM (aka CD quality,) And don't get me started on vinyl. Listening to vinyl is like watching a TV covered in dust.

Tilt!

And what exactly is your reliable test equipment for such methodology?

You'll be telling us next that you can take better pictures on a mobile phone than on a professional camera.

COLD because I have no idea what this "CD" is. How do I redeem it online? :wink:

Wouldn't be so bad if people that are decrying CDs as old hat were at least streaming 16 Bit FLAC or even better moving forward with technology with 24 Bit FLAC, but nope it will be 20 year olds that are used to terrible modern production techniques that crush all dynamic range in production which suits lossy compression just fine.

What are these CDs you speak of? I don't think my laptop, bluetooth speaker or tablet have somewhere you can put them in.

Shame that they closed the nice big store in Watford at the weekend, in favour of a smaller one that you can't swing a cat in.

still £1 each in my local.

Anyone tell me if available (or to be) online? Can't access site ATM.

Many thanks

Yes I like to put music onto my original Xbox hard drive and then listen to it through pc monitors speakers.

Been collecting a few Now Thats What I Call Music CDs recently, will keep my eye open for more :smiley:

So you really have no comprehension of Hi-Fi equipment, CD quality music either via physical medium or via FLAC container files then.

Why do you need a container for CDs when you can just listen to youtube on your phone.

You sir have NFI

I said container file, not a physical container...as in FLAC has compression but retains the same bitrate as the original audio.

Original Data: aaaaaaabcdeeeefg
Compressed Data: !7abcd!4efg

While the compressed data isn't as large of an amount of data, the program will know that ![n] means to repeat the character a certain amount of times so that it appears the exact same way as the original data.

Other than portable means...car, motorcycle (bluetooth helmet), phone etc I would never listen to MP3 either via files or Youtube.....crap in crap out.

Why would I want to take a step backwards in the audio world?

Seems like the majority of the general public these days do not care, both with audio and video...and that really affects those of us that do...ironically though whilst people are accepting of playing music through crappy equipment and not buying into either amps or receivers, they are being sucked into buying 4K with very little content there, it really is odd.....yet people decry physical media.

I wrote this only the other day on another forum......

The problem with streaming at least from a subscription based perspective, Netflix, Amazon Instant Video etc is providing you have a decent enough broadband connection to receive 1080P streaming (4-5mbps), the transmission bit rate still is not at the same level as Blu Ray. Add in those of us that own AV Receivers and only getting Dolby Digital 5.1 at best out of streaming.

The problem is just the same for those that have taken to 4K TVs, Netflix Ultra HD transmits at a lowly 15mbps, and even with a more optimised codec with H.265/HEVC the quality of transmissions are only marginally better than existing Blu Ray.

Things are 'slightly' better on the TV side of things (albeit with limited broadcasting) with BT Ultra HD transmitting at around 30mbps. Whilst offering better quality, still not the full quality you should be expecting of 4K, and with many UK home struggling with broadband speeds and a recommended requirement of around 38-45mbps, outside of the realm of a good number, with once again compressed audio.

It is kind of ironic that on one hand the general public is quite accepting of substandard video and audio (streaming and compressed music) yet marketing has people in their droves switching to 4K TVs when the infrastructure simply is not there....not to mention the biggest irony of all......

Those that have been ditching or not even taking up Blu Ray in its current format would need one of the new forthcoming Ultra HD Blu Ray players to be able to take advantage of 4K at its best instead of around half its potential at best in streaming.

But CDs are wellllll old isn't that a step backwards? You should go forwards and play Spotify on your Smart TV.

I think you are missing the point....whilst they may be old from a physical perspective they offer better audio quality than MP3. My own 'step forward' is playing exactly the same bit-rate of CDs or higher via streaming 16 Bit FLAC or better still 24 Bit FLAC when artists rarely release in such a format.

As for taking a step forward with Spotify, it is not, once again the standard subscription to Spotify has sub-par lossy MP3s at 160kbps, even premium it is at 320kbps.....16 Bit CD quality is 1411kbps and 24 Bit audio around 2304kbps.

And why would I play music through my tv when I have a home cinema setup?!?

I don't want to spoil the fun but I think some of the point missing here may be deliberate? Take it easy, folks.

I'll bet that you cannot, given the same mastering, tell the difference between a track encoded in 16 bits and one encoded at 24 bits. I mean a series of proper ABX tests where you get >95% correct. You may think that you can tell the difference but I'll bet you can't. I've tried it and I can't. Very few people can, if any at all.

Anybody thinking of buying these from the website the postage is £4.

That depends I can most certainly tell the difference between lossy MP3 and 16 Bit FLAC/CD. Of recent Hi-Resolution 24 Bit files I can most certainly notice the difference on Goldfrapp - Tales Of Us, NiN - Hesitation Marks and Of Monsters And Men - Beneath The Skin, but certainly has not been apparent on other recordings, particularly older albums that have had 24 Bit masters.

Never heard of FLAC. If it was as good as you say MP3s wouldn't be so popular.

are we seriously debating the best way to listen to a destiny's child CD?

I suspect that most of us could if we all had thousand of pounds worth of audio equipment.. But with standard and even high-end headphones / media players you'd be hard pressed to hear any quality difference over 320kbs.

But my cans "only" cost me £150 and I'm using my mobos integrated sound solution. Therefore the line gets fuzzy after 256kbs and blurs completely after 320kbs
It's easy to tell anything under 256kbs though

Are you for real!

It doesn't require thousands of pounds of audio equipment, I am pretty sure you can tell the difference between MP3 and uncompressed with a moderately decent amplifier and bookshelf/standmount speakers, standard Hi-Fi equipment.

Of course most receivers these days have sound restoration technology in order to attempt to enhance MP3s, but that is not the point...the point is arguing that CDs are dead and that MP3 is better, it simply is not.

MP3 is great in its rightful place...a lossy digital media for storage convenience and low bandwidth streaming, but why would I choose MP3 over FLAC or CD in the home environment on Hi-Fi equipment? I simply do not want or need to add into another equation that is not necessary. I may not notice on badly mastered albums to start with, but at least I am not throwing in guess work or removing frequencies in the audio end result.

I'm definitely in the FLAC/CD camp

But I've got these blue pills that should help.

Exactly. CDs/FLACs are the closest form to getting music/audio in its lossless condition.

Yes.

Hello Mr. Pertwee,

Still playing the straw man I see.

Have a read of this; preumably harvard is a good enough source for you?

My name is not Pertwee?

tl;dr

Why are people bothered that I prefer to record a song I like on the radio onto a cassette, use a converter to put this on my PC then put this on my phone to play whenever and wherever I want.

[Link] I think you will find he is giving you an analogy of being a straw man with your argument.

Oh c'mon Worzel we know who you are.

Ok.

Who is Worzel?

Let me explain this simply for you, or as simply as I can.....

Currently, in physical digital format the old 1980s developed 'redbook' CD is about as far as we have come with 2 channel 16-bit 44.1khz audio.

In modern environments, it still can be used as effective as ever. It can also be converted from a physical medium of CD to be stored in the cloud or on a hard disk as a wave file (WAV), or even more conveniently 'compressed' for unpacking in a container file called FLAC which many a modern receiver and even some high resolution digital players support. Along with many applications for phones and computers.

MP3 is popular because it takes this uncompressed audio, cuts out the frequencies in order to compress it and is very popular due to convenience and low file size in comparison and is particularly useful with portable devices with low storage memory and convenient for low bandwidth streaming, however, its popularity does not make it better than either CD, WAV or FLAC.

Now process that without being a straw man.

You know someone called Sally, right?

If he was born in 1992, modern compression in production in the likes of dubstep is not going to sound any better even if he had heard of Marantz, NAD, Rotel, Arcam etc. Let alone have heard of old Wurzel Gummidge.

Best left streaming spotify or youtube through PC speakers, he is hardly going to be digging out prog-rock classics for subtlety and dynamics :smile:

Oh that's his birth year? I thought it might be his age :wink: In that case he probably doesn't know what a guitar is either.

Great brands you mention there, I've used them all.

Remember these classics? NAD3020 (Link)
Marantz PM310 (Link)

I haven't felt the need to upgrade my amp for years now though; still chuggin' on an Arcam Alpha 6 Plus from the 90's :smiley:

What is best to listen to them with? The earphones that came with my iPhone or Dr Dre Beats?

Yep, I have a couple of NAD CD Players C521i and C545BEE but both post millennium. I have two home cinema setups, one in the lounge, the other in the bedroom but sadly do not have the space for any vintage stuff...particularly liked the golden period of the late 70s into around 1980-81. Looking at all those vintage amps and stereo receivers, my heart has been set on a Pioneer SX-1980, not only one of the nicest looking receivers from that time period, but regarded as one of the best sounding of its time too. There were some really nice looking Kenwood (Trio) receivers of the late 70s as well.

For you, most certainly the Dre Beats, after all everyone has heard of those, they must be good...right.

That's really is a thing of beauty.

I cannot find any reference to 'Destiny's Child' in the on-line selection. I think some people on this thread have been on a wind up!

You will definitely find them in store. Wedged most likely between Travis, Dido, The Corrs, Robbie Williams, Annie Lennox, Sugababes, David Gray and Sting.

What's with all the "Replay CD" prefixes? Is there anything different from the original pressing of each?

Best place to buy CDs nowadays. I got through each block of about 12 CDs and already at least 3 everytime. Just wish the would stack them with a spines showing as you just can't reach the top ones to flick through, it's so dumb