Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the OldVersion.com Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default best version of iTunes for Windows XP?

    What is the best version of iTunes to use on Windows XP for ripping MP3s, playing MP3s and burning CDs? Currently I'm using 4.9.0.17. I tried version 5 but liked the interface of 4.9 better so I switched back. I'd prefer a version that's less of a resource hog than having one that has every feature under the sun. I like to rip MP3s using VBR with the minimum kbps set to 128, 160 or 192.

    Daniel
    Dell Inspiron 8600
    1.4 GHz Pentium M Banias CPU
    512 MB Memory
    60 GB 5400 RPM hard drive
    4x DVD+RW drive

  2. #2
    Release Candiate 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    46

    Default

    The mp3 encoder contained within i-tunes is poor when compared to the lame encoder. SeeHydrogen Audio for more. You will be better off using the i-tunes aac codec if you want to stick with i-tunes unless of course you have a portable player that only supports mp3.

    I would suggest using lame with a frontend and then import the files into your i-tunes library.

  3. #3

    Default EAC and LAME better quality, iTunes easier

    On my Windows XP Pro PC I used Exact Audio Copy V0.9 beta 4 with LAME 3.90.3 to rip and encode a song using (--alt-preset standard). Then I ripped and encoded the same song 3 times with different settings using iTunes 4.9.0.17. All files are MP3 format (no AAC). Here are the settings and the resulting files with bit rates:

    Program - Setting - File Size - Bit Rate
    EAC with LAME - (--alt-preset standard) - 4.7 MB - 240 kbps
    iTunes - 192 VBR - 4.2 MB - 214 kbps
    iTunes - 160 VBR - 3.6 MB - 185 kbps
    iTunes - 128 VBR - 3.0 MB - 152 kbps
    time of song 2 minutes 41 seconds

    I listen to the songs on headphones connected to my notebook. I can't tell a difference between any of the files. I plan to listen to the files on my notebook with the built-in speakers or connected headphones. However, any of these 4 files does sound better than the 128 CBR that I used to rip and encode MP3s with using iTunes. I admit that EAC LAME will produce a higher quality MP3 file for a given bit rate based on what I've read on the internet. Why am I still thinking about using iTunes then? Well, first, for my uses, I can't hear the difference. True, in the future I could buy a high end sound system which would show the difference. But second, and more important, iTunes is just so much easier to use. I plan to use iTunes as my MP3 player/organizer. Using EAC/LAME requires me to retag a lot of the info in the files. In iTunes, I just insert a CD, import, eject and repeat. I have about 150 CDs to import. I'm going overseas with my notebook and want my music on my hard drive instead of carrying around 150 CDs with me. If there were a way to automatically get correct tag information into iTunes by using EAC/LAME or another program then I might consider sticking with EAC/LAME. As it stands now, I'm leaning toward iTunes with 192 VBR. Suggestions?

    Daniel

  4. #4
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    3,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dgrnyc
    In iTunes, I just insert a CD, import, eject and repeat. I have about 150 CDs to import. I'm going overseas with my notebook and want my music on my hard drive instead of carrying around 150 CDs with me. If there were a way to automatically get correct tag information into iTunes by using EAC/LAME or another program then I might consider sticking with EAC/LAME. As it stands now, I'm leaning toward iTunes with 192 VBR. Suggestions?

    Daniel
    Not sure why your not getting song titles auto filled in while using EAC, but it does handle this. Check you settings, use a up to date EAC if your using an older version, or make the necessary changes to the CDDB database address - if applicable.

    You might also want to use LAME 3.97 or 3.98 over 3.90.
    Can download those here
    http://lame.bakerweb.biz/


    LAME MP3 Encoder 3.90.3 is no longer being recommended as preferred version - LAME MP3 Encoder 3.97 beta took its place.

  5. #5

    Default

    I upgraded to EAC 0.95 beta 3 and LAME 3.97 beta 1. Both versions of EAC did add tags but Artist was incorrectly being shown as the same as the song title. I've reduced the work some. I'm still on the fence. Higer Quality of LAME vs less work with iTunes. Thanks for the replies.

  6. #6

    Default going with EAC and LAME

    I've decided the higher quality of EAC and LAME is worth the extra work. I'll rip and encode with EAC and LAME and then use iTunes as a player and correct any error in the tags.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Pctools Around Version 4
    By WarriorOfLight in forum Requests
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-05-2009, 05:42 PM
  2. Musicmatch Jukebox
    By Thracken in forum Programs / Support
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 05-27-2008, 03:24 PM
  3. Old Version Of Aim Will Not Work.
    By Squashman in forum Programs / Support
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-21-2003, 12:36 PM
  4. Movie Magic Screenwriter, Older Version...
    By magnus in forum Requests
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-09-2003, 09:21 AM
  5. Icq Lite First Version
    By ralphi_d in forum Programs / Support
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-05-2003, 04:58 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •