Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the '10.4: Use Automator to mass-convert iTunes tracks' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
10.4: Use Automator to mass-convert iTunes tracks
Authored by: badger brigade on Jun 30, '05 07:21:26PM

Reducing the quality of all your music for the sake of about $3 worth of storage space (maybe $10 if it's a laptop) doesn't seem like a very good exchange.



[ Reply to This | # ]
10.4: Use Automator to mass-convert iTunes tracks
Authored by: sweyhrich on Jun 30, '05 08:09:31PM

Just my comments on the conversion process and whether or not any quality is lost:

I did an experiment on one of my files last year, before I gave a talk about digital music. I converted a song from MP3 160 kbps to AAC 128 kbps, and then back to MP3 to AAC to MP3 to AAC to MP3, etc. I went through about 10 conversions altogether (five each), and a comparison of the final MP3 file with the first one resulted in something in which I simply could not detect any difference.

My (limited) understanding of compression algorithms is that they cut out high and low information that my ears (brain?) don't really notice much anyway. If you've cut the tops off the peaks, and the bottoms off the valleys, you can't cut anything more out upon repeated conversion. So IN MY OPINION, I would have no problems with quality in making a conversion like this.

Regarding disk space: On my PowerBook G4, I have already upgraded the hard drive from its original 40 gb size to an 80 gb drive, and I am again down to less than 10 gb free. I don't have as many MP3 files to convert as the originator of this hint, but if I could regain as much as 5 GB by making the conversion, I would do it in an instant. The "cheapness" of disk storage doesn't help when it involves yet another hard drive upgrade, or an iPod upgrade.

---
Steven Weyhrich
http://apple2history.org



[ Reply to This | # ]
10.4: Use Automator to mass-convert iTunes tracks
Authored by: kirkmc on Jul 01, '05 04:36:05AM

You said:

My (limited) understanding of compression algorithms is that they cut out high and low information that my ears (brain?) don't really notice much anyway. If you've cut the tops off the peaks, and the bottoms off the valleys, you can't cut anything more out upon repeated conversion. So IN MY OPINION, I would have no problems with quality in making a conversion like this.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. It's more like making a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy... Each format removes certain types of data, not just highs and lows; if that's all they removed, you wouldn't get compression at a factor of ten (a 128 kbps track is compressed to about 1/10 of its size; the original is 1411 kpbs).

---
Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more



[ Reply to This | # ]