Looks like you created them wrong then, no surprise there as your a dimwit and need Apple to do it for you!

Seriously I don't know why you peddle misinformation like this as there are some out there (outside of your band of merry Apple sheep on here who I couldn't give a **** about) who may believe you! Sad that you feel a need to do this espcially as it was only yesterday you admitted to reading the statement on a forum and now you are touting it that you can hear it

 

i will stick to my vinyl chaps. much better than any cd,mp3 or acc.

 

****ing Hipsters

 

Jack convert your CD to FLAC and you have best possible quality...but your fecking iTunes can play FLAC.Agree with Vinyl,still i'm using and still love the sound of Vinyl and mainly warmth sound of Vinyl its best


Jura

 

Best possible is recording from a CD, I think not.

 

You have not quite grasped it yet Jack your aac 256kbps apple recordings are COMPRESSED, also known as lossy due to them removing information for compression, instant degraded quality, cd's Ron at a data rate of approximately 1400kbps, or to you, a much higher rate than your apple acc 256kbps compressed data.
The cd is uncompressed or lossless, meaning it's of a far higher quality than your apple downloads, and you paid apple for crap, which is why at you as apple are saying "cheers easy"

Tony

Ps, the s2 is far a nicer handset than the iPhone 4, sorry to disappoint you

 

So Tony, you're saying that CD is the best quality you can get? Nothing has changed from the Studio to the CD. That's about as truthful as you stating that your S2 - the subject of this thread and a disappointment for 10's of millions - is better than an iPhone.

At the end of the day you have an unsupported phone that you think is great, the subject of this thread. And I have had my self imported iTunes library upgraded from 192kbps MP3 to 256kbps AAC and I haven't had to visit the loft and spend 3 solid days doing the job. I guess you're right, you're the winner here

 

Jack, you cannot read or are you just stupid?
CD has a data rate of around 1400kbps, aac has a data rate of 256kbps.
I'll make it simple for you, its just like teaching a 4 year old

You have your jedward cd, its 1000 bits long in uncompressed form, you are using aac though so its 200 bits long as its compressed, so you lose 800bits in compression.

CD is a MUCH higher quality item than a compressed aac offering, and you paid for it Apple love you give them £21 quid and they will still give you a compressed offering, wonderful

And the S2, yes its much nicer and dare I say, better, than my 3gs and 4.

Tony

 

Tony, what Jack is trying to say is the the 256kbps file from iTunes sounds better than the 256kbps file from a CD.

His reasoning (or rather the reasoning of the poster on the fourm he read it on yesterday) is that this is becuase the iTunes file is created from the master which is higher quality than CD.

Obviously to anyone who understands audio formats it cannot be 'better' than the version from the CD as both the CD and the master are much hgher quality than a 256kbps format, but it could sound different due to the way the compression is done.

If that is the case then I would say get a better ripper program for the CD as there is no logical reason as to why the CD version should sound worse than the iTunes master derived version.

It also depends on what you are listening to all this on. Maybe the iTunes version is tuned to the iPod style of device and has an artificial frequency curve applied that boosts certain frequencies.... who knows!

What is fact though is that a 256kbps file cannot sound better than any other 256kbps file solely due to the source if the sources are of a much higher quality than 256kbps... that is pure nonsense!

 

Tony, do my files sound better than they did? And could you make them sound better for less than £21? That's what's important. That and the subject of this thread of course, which you seem to be avoiding, poor Samsung users, no security updates for you, shame on you Samsung.

 

"What is fact though is that a 256kbps file cannot sound better than any other 256kbps file solely due to the source if the sources are of a much higher quality than 256kbps... that is pure nonsense!"

That's non sence.

 

Just basic maths - 256kbps is less than 1400 kbps and less than 2000kbps hence a 256kbps file generated from the 2000 file cannot contain more data than one created from the 1400!!

 

Who said anything about more? Garbage in Garbage out.

 

Geez, you still dont get it it can be the best source file in the world, the second you compress it, it doesnt make a difference, its now compressed, compressed = low quality, so a cd is better as its uncompressed or lossless (you need to look up these terms), compressed is lossy, or basically, you lose quality for compression.

As for my Samsung Galaxy S2 not getting ICS, you best look again, its out next year
http://www.itproportal.com/2011/12/2...-begins-early/

Tony

 

You did as you said it sounds better because it came from a master. It obviously cannot sound better because of that. It may sound different, but as I think we have established your CD ripping isn't up to much... probably down to your lack of knowledge and/or some piece of **** Apple component messing it up for you as they aren't too hot on formats as we know!

 

No, you don't get it. I get my 256kbps file from Apple, it's provided by the studios and produced to the highest quality. You throw a jam covered CD into a ****ty PC and use some malware infected program to rip it to 256kbps and you still expect them both to sound the same, not only are you on the wrong thread, you're wrong.... again!

 

OMFG!! This thread has just become the most retarded thread of 2011! GAME OVER!!

 

You really dont get it Jack, your "master" copy is exactly the same master copy they use to rip cd's, except that the cd is uncompressed so of a far higher quality to the compressed crap you paid apple for
There is only one mug here and thats you Jack

Tony

PS, my samsung software (Kies) lets me burn cd's from 128kbps to 320kbps (in 3 different formats) to lossless 1411.2kbps (wav file), no dodgy software Jack

 

Whatever Jack

P.S. It was you who said the 256kbps files from your bekoevd iTunes sounded better than your CD rips so maybe it is that sh1tty Apple Mac you were using combined with you having no clue as to what you are doing of course

I am 100% confident that any CD rip I do will match the iTunes one. 1) By definition the output file is such low quality it would be hard not to and 2) I use a Naim Audio CD ripper which is just a bit better than your average PC/Mac drive

 

Only because someone on it is too thick to understand basic maths!

 

Two of you try to steer a thread away from its subject matter and all you do is prove you're good at name calling. Well done lads.

 

Wasn't name calling, just being descriptive ... and we have proved that you're wrong so all in a all a good result

Anyway don't worry as Ali will be along soon with his oh so funny can of troll spray graphic to tidy up the thread and remove yet more useful posts

 

You've proved nothing. I've just listened again, definitely better.

 

Which proves you know diddly about ripping CDs or that your Apple kit that does it is crap You choose! I know what I think

 

do not feed the troll ffs

 

I'm just watching him on TV now

Tony

 

I suggest you read your own link from post one again, the S2 has always and will be getting the ICS update.

 

Merry Christmas Jack.

http://www.xda-developers.com/androi...tab-after-all/

 

It's only a review but see what starting a thread like this can achieve. Apart from the trolls trying to turn it into an Apple thread.

"presumably due to negative reactions and widespread criticism."

 

Taken from your link Jack

And do you know what the difference between Samsung and Apple is Jack?
Samsung listen, Apple just fob people off with bad software.

The only person who made this into an Apple v Android thread is you Jack, you rub "android sucks lol" into the android users, yet you wont even accept that Apple are far from perfect, they do no wrong in your eyes, us unblinkered people though, can see that even though android is far from perfect, we have an option, with apple you can only jailbreak, then you have no options from Apple as you have invalidated everything.

I've 2 apple phones and one android, and so far the android (Samsung Galaxy S2) is the better handset.
I "may" still get an iphone 4S on contract, that way I can compare both for their plus and negative points.
But I really am getting annoyed with Apple (in more ways than one), mainly their attitude to customers and their software issues that they refuse to fix.

Tony