iTunes for Windows

[AugustWest]

CONS:

None.

Other cons: Terrible quality - all the time!

Ah, mais non mon ami Slink.  

The terrible sound quality on 8-tracks is a PRO.  It increases one's desire to see a band live, thus increasing the tour revenue to the band and the breadth of experience to the listener.  Also, makes one appreciate the high quality, static free sound on the FM radio (brought to you by our friends at Clear Channel!)

[jough]

It's true that once you make a CD from files you download from iTunes you could in effect rip that CD into MP3s of your choice (although you'll lose quality in both directions of that transfer) and then you'll have mp3s that you can play in any device and copy and trade with friends to your heart's content.

Choop, I understand that most albums suck and often you'll want only a single song from an entire album - and with CD singles being a thing of the past, there's even more of a compelling reason to offer a service *like* iTunes - my point is that iTunes has several barriers to true usefulness: cost, quality, selection (which will improve over time, of course), and that stupid need to restrict the use of those files you just paid for.

Remember when Napster was going to come back with a pay service, but they were going to use a proprietary audio format (the .nap files, loosely based on wma) and the consumers scoffed?  

Well, two years later Apple tries the same thing and people just go apeshit.  Why?  Apple's marketing is better than Napster's was.

Don't believe the hype, people.

[slink]

One great tip for anyone ripping mp3s...
DON'T use Joint Stereo. Use something like the Lame, or Blade encoder, and make sure you set it at stereo, and probably at least 192 (best ratio I found - space/quality wise).
My friend and I did some tests on Joint Stereo after working out what it does the the audio, and it is an hideous algorithm.
It essentially chops huge chunks it thinks you don't need from the mp3, which means that you can lose whole sections of songs. You may not notice it, but if you compare it to a stereo version, you would.

[CortJstr]

It's true that once you make a CD from files you download from iTunes you could in effect rip that CD into MP3s of your choice (although you'll lose quality in both directions of that transfer)

Mp3 is lossy by definition but I didn't think there was an loss going from mp3->CD. Is the format iTunes uses different in this respect?

One great tip for anyone ripping mp3s...
DON'T use Joint Stereo. Use something like the Lame, or Blade encoder, and make sure you set it at stereo, and probably at least 192 (best ratio I found - space/quality wise).

Don't use Blade. It's not being developed any more. Lots of people will talk your ear off that LAME has always been better, but now even the Blade guy says not to use BladeEnc.

I've heard lots of discussions over at the Audiograbber forum about stereo and IIRC they all seem to recomend joint. I'm not really an audiophile (in fact I'm tone-deaf) so I just stick with --alt present standard which produces VBR files with an average bitrate of 192, depending on the song.

[jough]

Yeah, if you want the best quality, don't use the "Joint Stereo" option - the idea behind JS is that it removes the redundancy between the two channels (left and right) thus saving file space - but everything ends up sounding like it was recorded under water.

192Kbps is the bit rate I use.  It makes the file sizes a bit bigger than 128Kbps (which is more common - and about 1Mb per minute of music).

Also, if you really want the best quality, don't use VBR (Variable Bit Rate) because like with Joint Stereo, they haven't really gotten the kinks out yet - it always removes something audible.

Another format that gets absolutely no press this side of the pond is ATRAC, Sony's algorithm that's used with Minidisc and sounds nearly identical to CDs.  Of course, ATRAC songs aren't compatible with most MP3 players.

[CortJstr]

I'm willing to take the VBR hit. I think I'm getting better quality than 192 CBR and better file sizes. If there's silence, or near silence, it's just a waste of space to be using all 192kb but if there's a lot going on 192 might not cut it. And if you're really anal there are always the ones like --alt preset extreme

[AlohaDawg]

Is it time for the dick sucking to start yet? I'm tired of reading all this.

[jough]

Is it time for the dick sucking to start yet? I'm tired of reading all this.

There are MANY other threads of which to partake, home slice.

[AlohaDawg]

None of the others sounded as fun as getting my dick sucked, except maybe the one where Slink tells us about how he sets his face on fire...

Come on, man, it can't be all humpin' and no nut! That ain't American!

[AugustWest]

It's a little known fact that virtually all of the soundtracks for classic 1970's porno films were recorded directly to 8-track tape.

Plenty of dick suckin' going on there.

[Choop]

Jesus, it's like you fuckers never get your dicks sucked in real life. There's more to the world than the internet! I had my dick sucked twice today! Get on out there and find yourself someone willing to touch your peckers with their tongues!

Do I have to do everything for you people?

[AlohaDawg]

Not to mention humpin' and nuttin'!

I feel much better already.

[CortJstr]

Sexin' talk goes in the Lounge. You know better than this people.