How good is the iTunes MP3 Encoder?

Question

Level 1

6 points

How good is the iTunes MP3 Encoder?

One solution to the infamous "determining gapless playback" problem appears to be to to use the iTunes MP3 encoder when ripping the original songs to MP3, instead of some third-party encoder.

Traditionally the iTunes encoder was considered one of the worst ones on the market, which is why I've avoided using it. But all the tests I've seen were from several years ago. Does anyone know any OBJECTIVE tests comparing a recent version of iTunes encoder to others, e,g, LAME?). FWIW, I'm encoding at 224 kbps/ VBR, "Highest Quality". At those settings I can'r hear any difference between iTunes and LAME, but I don't have audiophile-quality gear to test it on.

I don't want to rip over a thousand CD's, and then get good listening gear, and find out the iTunes-encoded MP3's were crap. But on the other hand this DOES fix the "determinmg gapless playback" problem.

8G nano

Posted on Jul 2, 2007 5:38 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Jul 2, 2007 6:00 PM in response to iplnelson

This is sort of an interesting question. Unless you plan on dropping $10,000+ on your audio system, I wouldn't worry too much about the quality of your encoded files. I use the same settings you are and can't differentiate between the CD itself and the encoded files.

Chances are if you go with an audio system of that quality you're not going to be using iTunes to manage it, and probably wouldn't be using Mp3 format.

Just my two bits on it.

Reply

Answer 2

Ninja1

Level 1

5 points

Jul 2, 2007 6:12 PM in response to iplnelson

I would recommend consider using AAC vice MP3 as it is a newer codec. You get better quality encodes taking less space than MP3. I usually rip at 256K which I can't tell the difference from the original CD. I also read that 256K AAC (or MP4) recordings are equivilant in sound quality to 320K MP3. Consider ripping a recording at different levels and do a playback to see how they sound. I did this using everything from 128K to Apple lossless and opted for 256K.

Overall, I think the iTunes AAC encoder does a very good job with ripping CDs. I have ripped a few MP3s in the past and understand where you concluded that it was inferior to other encoders for MP3s. Unless you are doing playback on a device that doesn't support the new standard, you should really give the AAC a try.

Reply

Answer 3

iplnelson Author

Level 1

6 points

Jul 2, 2007 7:45 PM in response to Ninja1

I would recommend consider using AAC vice MP3

No, AAC is too proprietary. I need a format I can play on ANYTHING.

My wife and I are really into music (infact she's a musician) and we like to share music with our friends and we like to have music everywhere we go. This means . . .
My car stereo, which plays MP3,
My wife's car stereo, which play MP3
My boomboxes, which plays MP3
My cellphone, which plays MP3
My wife's cellphone, which plays MP3
My wife's iRiver, which plays MP3

. . . you get the idea. AAC is marginally better on a kpbs-to-kpbs basis to MP3. i.e., 128 AAC is abouut the same as 160 MP3, but any difference at 192 is inaudible to me.

Reply

Answer 4

camoracer

Level 5

4,274 points

Jul 3, 2007 12:57 AM in response to iplnelson

What problem with determining gapless? I have had to switch ripping programs since iTunes quit recognizing CDs in drive or refusing to import properly.

I use Audiograbber with LAME. No problems at all with adding the files to iTunes and I get faster ripping speeds than I ever did with iTunes.

Reply

Answer 5

iplnelson Author

Level 1

6 points

Jul 3, 2007 7:24 AM in response to camoracer

What problem with determining gapless?

When you 'add folder to library' iTunes does a "determining gapless playback" for every song it did not personally rip itself. That's no big deal if you have a small song collection on your local harddrive.

But my wife and I have our MP3 collection on a network HD. We currently have about 4000 songs and add a few hundred every day. We're converting our 1300 CD collection to MP3, plus we buy new CD's all the time so it's growing even as we rip. Two of our PC's are laptops and over our 802.11b wireless network (which works fine) it takes an hour to "determine gapless playback" for 200 songs. And we have to do this on 4 PC's.

BTW this "determining gapless playback" problem has ****** people off all over the internet (just Google it) and some people have UNinstalled their 7.x and gone back to 6.05, or stopped using iTunes altogether because of it. Apple said here the other day they have no plans to fix it.

So . . . back to my question - does anyone know any RECENT tests comparing iTunes MP3 encoder to LAME, Windows Media, XING, etc? In the past iTunes has gotten bad reviews but all the tests I saw were old versions of iTunes running with low settings, e.g., 160 kbps CBR, etc.

Reply

Answer 6

Jul 3, 2007 8:06 AM in response to iplnelson

I would recommend consider using AAC vice MP3

No, AAC is too proprietary. I need a format I can
play on ANYTHING.

My wife and I are really into music (infact she's a
musician) and we like to share music with our friends
and we like to have music everywhere we go. This
means . . .
My car stereo, which plays MP3,
My wife's car stereo, which play MP3
My boomboxes, which plays MP3
My cellphone, which plays MP3
My wife's cellphone, which plays MP3
My wife's iRiver, which plays MP3

MP3 is certainly the most widely supported format, no argument there. However, you can get various add-ons to interface an iPod directly to in car audio systems (typically via the CD changer interface) which would let you play any format the iPod supports and still control it via the radio controls. According to Apple 70% of all new cars on sale in the US offer an iPod interface as an option.

By the way AAC is not a proprietary standard, it is an official industry standard and is part of the MPEG4 specifications. Many mobile phones play AAC, even apparently the Zune from Microsoft can play AAC.

For what its worth AAC and Apple Lossless can be played by all the following

iTunes
iPod
iPhone
TV
Roko SoundBridge
Sonos ZonePlayer
SlimDevices SqueezeBox
Windows Media Player (yes really!)
Microsoft Media Center (see above)
Microsoft Media Center Extender (see above)
Foobar 2000
WinAmp
dbPowerAmp
MPlayer
VLC

and I am sure many others

The Xbox 360, The PS3 and PSP, and many mobile phones can play AAC (although not Apple Lossless).

Reply

Answer 7

Jul 3, 2007 8:08 AM in response to iplnelson

The Determining Gapless playback issue can be annoying but it only affects certain music formats. Lossless formats do not have this issue, I have all my music in Apple Lossless and as a result never get this message.

Reply

Answer 8

Chris CA

Level 10

82,513 points

Jul 3, 2007 8:11 AM in response to iplnelson

I haven't seen anything in the last few years comparing the iTunes MP3 encoder.

Apple said here the other day they have no plans to fix it
Actually, that is quite what was written.
In response to, "If I don't need or want gapless playback I should be able to turn it off.

This is a very serious bug in iTunes 7.x that makes it almost unusable for me"

Roy B replied, "We do not consider this a bug, and have no plans to change this behavior. "

Reply

Answer 9

iplnelson Author

Level 1

6 points

Jul 3, 2007 11:39 AM in response to John Lockwood

MP3 is certainly the most widely supported format, no
argument there. However, you can get various add-ons
to interface an iPod directly to in car audio systems
(typically via the CD changer interface) which would
let you play any format the iPod supports and still
control it via the radio controls. According to Apple
70% of all new cars on sale in the US offer an iPod
interface as an option.

We're not going to buy a new car just so we can attach our iPods. Our current car stereos play MP3 just fine.

iTunes
iPod
iPhone

. . . blah blah . . .

MPlayer
VLC

and I am sure many others

So what's your point? Lots of places accept American Express, too, but most places don't, which is why most people use Mastercard or Visa. The bottom line is that I can play MP3 on every music-playing device I own.

Also, what does Apple Lossless have to do with this? Our music collection would take over a TB using Apple Lossless (plus we'd need another TB drive to back it up) whereas we can fit the whole collection on an 80G iPod using MP3 at 196 or 224.

So rather than changing the subject, would somone please answer the question?

Reply