AAC CD vs MP3 CD

compact disc, dacs, mp3 players and streaming audio
JoeE SP9
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
United States of America
Posts: 5168
Joined: 23 Feb 2009 19:20
Location: Phildelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by JoeE SP9 » 24 Sep 2019 00:04

Music files are not data files. I'm guessing that you actually used low bit rate MP3 files. Otherwise you couldn't get that many files on a CD-R. If you burn music files to a CD-R they have to be WAV, or a compressed format such as FLAC or MP3.

Burning music files to CD-R is something I rarely do. A thumb drive is much more convenient and has a much greater capacity.

NOYB
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 249
Joined: 01 Jul 2019 01:12

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by NOYB » 24 Sep 2019 03:34

JoeE SP9 wrote:
24 Sep 2019 00:04
Music files are not data files. I'm guessing that you actually used low bit rate MP3 files. Otherwise you couldn't get that many files on a CD-R. If you burn music files to a CD-R they have to be WAV, or a compressed format such as FLAC or MP3.

Burning music files to CD-R is something I rarely do. A thumb drive is much more convenient and has a much greater capacity.
Do a little math:
55 typical length songs is only about 500 MB at 320kpbs.

Read a few posts:
As was mentioned they even fit on 2 redbook CDs.

Get down tonight...

JoeE SP9
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
United States of America
Posts: 5168
Joined: 23 Feb 2009 19:20
Location: Phildelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by JoeE SP9 » 24 Sep 2019 20:21

320kbps files are MP3 files. They are not data files. They are lossy compressed music files. That's why you can fit so many on a CD-R. MP3 files typically take up as little as 20% of the space an uncompressed WAV file does.

Lossy compression uses an algorithm to determine what is and isn't audible. What it determines is inaudible is discarded. That's why they take up so much less space.

Most CD-R's have a 700MB capacity. It says so on the disk. Bog standard Red Book CD's have a 640MB capacity.

I don't use MP3 files as IME they don't sound as good as FLAC or WAV files. While FLAC files are compressed they use a non-lossy compression scheme. WAV files are uncompressed. I use FLAC files exclusively.

raphaelmabo
long player
long player
Sweden
Posts: 2097
Joined: 30 Aug 2010 21:01
Location: Askersund, Sweden
Contact:

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by raphaelmabo » 24 Sep 2019 21:23

When I play tunes on CD converted from AAC or MP3 to CD audio format, I do find the AAC / MP3 sounding a little warmer, and lacking a bit in air and finer details. Compared to the original CD with same songs. I also hear a difference playing from my computer to D/A and comparing the album playing in my CD connected to the same D/A. So played through the same D/A, still a difference. I prefer the CD's. And I prefer them on the built-in D/A in my Marantz CD63 KI Signature. I do have two external D/A's, Alchemist TS-1D and the Cambridge DACMagic. Not big differences, but they are there.

raphaelmabo
long player
long player
Sweden
Posts: 2097
Joined: 30 Aug 2010 21:01
Location: Askersund, Sweden
Contact:

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by raphaelmabo » 24 Sep 2019 21:26

Re: AAC vs MP3. Well, I can honestly doesn't really tell an AAC at 256k bps from MP3 at 320k bps, so in that case I take the AAC because the files are smaller. :) This is my experience, AAC with a little less bps and therefore smaller size, plays equal to MP3 with a little higher bitrate and larger files.

I haven't tried lossless format, they are to big for my system I feel. :)

JoeE SP9
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
United States of America
Posts: 5168
Joined: 23 Feb 2009 19:20
Location: Phildelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by JoeE SP9 » 24 Sep 2019 22:13

I've already stated that I use FLAC exclusively. This is because IME there is audible degradation when using MP3 files regardless of the bit rate. This is especially evident with classical recordings.

I don't bother with AAC or ALAC as I don't have or use any Apple products.

FLAC files are generally around 40% of the size of a WAV file. A major plus for FLAC is that when de-compressed they are bit perfect to the original. AAC and MP3 are not bit perfect as some of the music is discarded when converting to AAC/MP3.

Storage space is so cheap nowadays I see no reason to use lossy compression. Amazon has 2TB HD drives for ~$50 and 2TB SS drives for ~$80. You can store ~18K FLAC files on a 500GB HDD.

andybeau
long player
long player
England
Posts: 3848
Joined: 06 Jun 2013 20:47
Location: Coventry, UK

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by andybeau » 24 Sep 2019 22:40

JoeE SP9 wrote:
24 Sep 2019 22:13
I've already stated that I use FLAC exclusively. This is because IME there is audible degradation when using MP3 files regardless of the bit rate. This is especially evident with classical recordings.

I don't bother with AAC or ALAC as I don't have or use any Apple products.

FLAC files are generally around 40% of the size of a WAV file. A major plus for FLAC is that when de-compressed they are bit perfect to the original. AAC and MP3 are not bit perfect as some of the music is discarded when converting to AAC/MP3.

Storage space is so cheap nowadays I see no reason to use lossy compression. Amazon has 2TB HD drives for ~$50 and 2TB SS drives for ~$80. You can store ~18K FLAC files on a 500GB HDD.
Big +1

Sunwire
long player
long player
United States of America
Posts: 2134
Joined: 07 Oct 2004 21:54
Location: New York

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by Sunwire » 25 Sep 2019 01:59

JoeE SP9 wrote:
24 Sep 2019 00:04
Music files are not data files. I'm guessing that you actually used low bit rate MP3 files. Otherwise you couldn't get that many files on a CD-R. If you burn music files to a CD-R they have to be WAV, or a compressed format such as FLAC or MP3.
He didn't say "music files are data files".
He said: "Well I burned a data CD of about 55 songs."
In other words, he burned some music files to a compact disc in a data CD format (CD-R), not in the music CD format (CD-DA).
When using the data CD format, you can burn whatever type of files you want onto the compact disc: text, images, video, music, etc. And the music data can be in whatever format you want: MP3, FLAC, WAV, AAC, OGG, etc.
When using the music CD format (CD-DA), you can only burn two-channel 16-bit PCM encoding at a 44.1 kHz sampling rate per channel.

But it's all data.

JoeE SP9
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
United States of America
Posts: 5168
Joined: 23 Feb 2009 19:20
Location: Phildelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by JoeE SP9 » 25 Sep 2019 17:19

I know exactly what he did. My original post commented that he used MP3 files.

Regardless; Music files are not data files. The only way to get 55 songs on a CD is to use lossy compressed files. Some don't like the reduced audio quality that results from lossy compression.

I know of no CD player that will play anything other than MP3 and CD-DA files from a CD.

FWIW: Lossy compression bears no resemblance to data compression such as Zip files. The closest audio analogy is FLAC. Zip and FLAC de-compress to be bit perfect to the original. MP3 and AAC can't do that as some of the music is discarded during the compression process.

Sunwire
long player
long player
United States of America
Posts: 2134
Joined: 07 Oct 2004 21:54
Location: New York

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by Sunwire » 26 Sep 2019 00:58


Adamo0926
senior member
senior member
United States of America
Posts: 551
Joined: 26 Feb 2011 03:22
Location: Connecticut

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by Adamo0926 » 26 Sep 2019 02:32

JoeE SP9 wrote:
25 Sep 2019 17:19
I know exactly what he did. My original post commented that he used MP3 files.

Regardless; Music files are not data files. The only way to get 55 songs on a CD is to use lossy compressed files. Some don't like the reduced audio quality that results from lossy compression.

I know of no CD player that will play anything other than MP3 and CD-DA files from a CD.

FWIW: Lossy compression bears no resemblance to data compression such as Zip files. The closest audio analogy is FLAC. Zip and FLAC de-compress to be bit perfect to the original. MP3 and AAC can't do that as some of the music is discarded during the compression process.
Actually it was 32 songs......it was originally 2 CDs with 16 songs each which was all that could fit on each CD time wise. The Apple ITunes default format is AAC Audio File. What I did was take all 32 of those songs and put them in one playlist. I then put in a blank CD and used the function from ITunes called "Burn Playlist to Disc". Another menu comes up giving several options.

There were 3 options for the format for the disc I was burning. They are as follows:
1) Audio CD (in which not all 32 songs would fit on the disc)
2) MP3 CD
3) Data CD or DVD (ITunes gives a warning that these discs may not play in all CD players)

I chose option number 3 and burned all 32 songs to a blank CD-R. As I said in a previous post, the CD plays in my home Marantz CD6006 player, also in my approximately 4 year old Pioneer radio/cd player I had installed in my Nissan Altima. But it does not play in the stock CD player that is in my 2007 Mustang GT.

This "data disc" also displays each songs info on the decks that it does play on.....Song Title, Artist and Album the song was on.

I could have fit many more songs on the CD-R using this format.

Make of all that what you will.

NOYB
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 249
Joined: 01 Jul 2019 01:12

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by NOYB » 26 Sep 2019 06:54

Adamo0926,

What is the driving force for using CDs?
Obviously you have some existing equipment. So there is that. Though one of them may not play anything other than redbook.

Since using compression anyway to fit on single CD, a smartphone and Bluetooth receiver probably wouldn't be any worse quality and way more convenient with much more music capacity. Tethered (wired AUX input) instead of Bluetooth should be "near perfect" quality. And you could even use FLAC files instead.

JoeE SP9
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
United States of America
Posts: 5168
Joined: 23 Feb 2009 19:20
Location: Phildelphia, Pennsylvania

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by JoeE SP9 » 26 Sep 2019 16:59

Of course all 32 songs will not fit on a CD-R unless lossy compressed down to MP3 size. Regardless, it's just an MP3 disk. The fact that it plays in an ordinary CD player is proof. A CD player will not recognize a true data disk. In fact, older players will not recognize an MP3 disk as the Mustang's player's results support.

I knew from your first post exactly what you did. IME the only difference between a data disk and an MP3 disk is that you can place regular computer files on the "data" disk along with MP3 files. A disk burned as a straight MP3 disk accepts only MP3 files. You can find out for yourself, as I did, by using a CD-RW to experiment. That way you don't waste CD-R blanks.

I started using a CD burner in the middle 90's. My first burner used a caddy to hold the disk. Along the way I've tried all the various schemes and compression algorithms including all the various lossy compression schemes. The drop in audio quality that lossy compression causes has always bothered me. Because of that loss I always returned to WAV (burn as RBCD) files. When FLAC became available I eagerly embraced it. It offers bit perfect de-compression. AAC/ MP3 does not do this. It can't, as part of the music is discarded when converted to AAC/MP3. If MP3/AAC files work for you that's good. If pop/rock/blues is your main interest you'll probably not notice much of a difference between MP3/AAC and non lossy files anyway. For classical lovers the loss is easily audible.

All the music files (~1TB) on my music server are FLAC. This includes all of my CD's/SACD's and a growing number of LP's.

I don't drive anymore and very rarely burn music files of any type to a CD-R. I live in the inner city and public transportation is quick convenient and easy. As a senior citizen I ride for free. My portable player has a 256GB Micro SD card for storage. That's enough to carry 9K files in FLAC format. It's more than enough for the longest ride/commute. My portable player plays all the lossy compressed format files which I never use. It also plays ALAC (I don't use this format), FLAC and dsd/dsf files.

NOYB
member
member
United States of America
Posts: 249
Joined: 01 Jul 2019 01:12

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by NOYB » 27 Sep 2019 20:21

KentT wrote:
14 Sep 2019 03:16
NOYB wrote:
11 Sep 2019 03:23
Vinylfreak86 wrote:
10 Sep 2019 14:20
But comparing playing files on a smartphone to original Compact disc album release, it is another world of quality of sound.
How so?
I know that Bluetooth (depending on version features) will compress audio. But is wired (AUX) reducing audio quality too?
Wired is lossless. Bluetooth is very lossy. No better than MP3 grade at high rates (and this is assuming APT-X is used on both ends of the connection). Voice grade.
How lossy depends on the Bluetooth version and features. Have read year or so ago that some do not recompress MP3. I suppose that would be considered very lossy as it is MP3. But if playing MP3 from a CD anyway then it's a wash.

Plus being in a poor acoustical and noisy environment such as a car it's not going to matter much.

Sterling1
senior member
senior member
United States of America
Posts: 845
Joined: 01 Feb 2017 16:28
Contact:

Re: AAC CD vs MP3 CD

Post by Sterling1 » 28 Sep 2019 00:38

Adamo0926 wrote:
03 Sep 2019 17:53
Was doing some research regarding burning CDs. Knowing that I could burn like 150 songs on a CD in MP3 format (a bit less if I were to use a 256 kbs bitrate), I wanted to ask you guys if any of you can hear an audible difference between a CD that was burned as a standard audio CD (AAC I assume) and a CD burned with music in the MP3 format (either 196 kbs or 256 kbs bitrate).

Also....can any of you say they hear a difference between MP3 files that are burned with 196 or 256 bitrates, respectively ?

If any of you can.....what would you say the difference is ? Dynamic range ? Low frequency or high frequency response ? Signal/Noise ratio ? etc

I just burned 2 CDs of Tool's new album "Fear Inoculum". One in standard audio AAC format (from Itunes), and the other I converted the originally downloaded songs to MP3s and then burned the CD with the songs in MP3 format.

I just listened to some of the standard audio AAC format and just started listening to the MP3 format now. Listening with a Marantz CD 6006, Yamaha CR-2020 receiver and a pair of the original Advent Loudspeaker. Tone controls set at the flat position. MP3 format burned with the 196 kbs bitrate. Right now listening to the first song I don't hear much of a difference. But if there is a difference it sounds to me like the MP3 format might be a bit brighter and not quite as full on the bottom end. But if I am hearing that difference it's pretty subtle....
I have two DAT Recordesr which will record at 16/44.1, 16/48 and 16/32. Recordings I have made at 16/32, for extended play, are kind of like 128k mp3, sounding awful, very fatiguing. At any rate, 256k is so good I can not discern it from 24/192; and, therefore, the CD's I've burned from iTunes downloads sound great for play in my cars and trucks I own. And speaking of iTunes, I've done many experiments where I have compared and contrasted their 256k downloads to 24/192 downloads of the same music from HDtracks. My conclusion is why pay $30 for an album that does not sound any better than the iTunes variety for just $9.99?