Old Alpine Deck or upgrade? Advice?
Thread Starter
0 Watt CAFz'r
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8
Old Alpine Deck or upgrade? Advice?
Hey there,
I'm new to this site, and am definitely not an expert when it comes to car stereos... I just like music and listening to it.
I just got a new used car (2002 Civic) and will be transferring over some things from my old car (1987 Prelude)... I'll keep my moderate amp and 8" sub, along with my Alpine SPR-172B speakers, and have decided to buy new Alpine type-R speakers.
So here's my question... I have the old Alpine CDM-7874 deck, and am wondering what a new $300 deck could do for me that this one can't. And here's the thing - I don't care about satellite radio or hooking up the iPod I will never own... the only thing I think I'd like in the new deck is MP3 compatibility. I'm all about sound quality... would the newer decks actually give better SQ or for a basic and good sounding CD player, would my 4 year old Alpine do the trick?
Any help would be appreciated!
Dave
I'm new to this site, and am definitely not an expert when it comes to car stereos... I just like music and listening to it.
I just got a new used car (2002 Civic) and will be transferring over some things from my old car (1987 Prelude)... I'll keep my moderate amp and 8" sub, along with my Alpine SPR-172B speakers, and have decided to buy new Alpine type-R speakers.
So here's my question... I have the old Alpine CDM-7874 deck, and am wondering what a new $300 deck could do for me that this one can't. And here's the thing - I don't care about satellite radio or hooking up the iPod I will never own... the only thing I think I'd like in the new deck is MP3 compatibility. I'm all about sound quality... would the newer decks actually give better SQ or for a basic and good sounding CD player, would my 4 year old Alpine do the trick?
Any help would be appreciated!
Dave
Originally Posted by theboy
If your deck already plays MP3's.....I would keep it ,you have better features in your deck than a new Alpine for eaqual money!
The 7874 doesn't play mp3's
Anyhow that isn't a bad deck but is missing a lot of sound shaping features that some of the higher end new models have.
The 2006 lineup is pretty crap, but units such as the 7984, 9811, 9813, 9815, 9833, 9835, 9853, 9855...etc have a lot more tuning options as well as the ability to play mp3's.
Originally Posted by Kevin31
Mp3 playback is just convenient... it's not going to sound better than uncompressed cd playback...
As you probably know, mp3 is a lossy compression technique...
.Zip files are an example of a lossless compression technique... (I use that because most anyone on the computer would immediately recognize a .zip file). If you uncompress a .zip file, the resulting files are back in their original form with no loss or degradation...
An mp3 file is a compressed format where even if you 'uncompress' by converting it back into a .wav file... you've lost details that you will never get back. .Jpg images are also an example of lossy compression...
Now will you really hear a difference... all depends on your ears and the quality of your install...
Depends on many factors... the 5.1 surround sound in the house is a lossy compression technique... do you notice it sounding worse than 2 ch PCM (uncompressed) playback... you should, I do (did).
Most Mp3's get compressed at a bitrate of 128 to save file size (keep them smaller, fit more songs on a disc)... I don't know that you would as easily be able to hear the difference between mp3 and .wav (pcm) if it was less compressed at a higher bitrate, etc... 256 or more. One just can't keep as many songs on one 700mb data disc then...
The simple answer is that mp3 will likely sound 'worse' than you're used to... the very definition of 'worse' hinges on detail... it's not like you're copying to cassette tape where you're now introducing noise... They aren't noisy (hiss) compared to the originals...
As you probably know, mp3 is a lossy compression technique...
.Zip files are an example of a lossless compression technique... (I use that because most anyone on the computer would immediately recognize a .zip file). If you uncompress a .zip file, the resulting files are back in their original form with no loss or degradation...
An mp3 file is a compressed format where even if you 'uncompress' by converting it back into a .wav file... you've lost details that you will never get back. .Jpg images are also an example of lossy compression...
Now will you really hear a difference... all depends on your ears and the quality of your install...
Depends on many factors... the 5.1 surround sound in the house is a lossy compression technique... do you notice it sounding worse than 2 ch PCM (uncompressed) playback... you should, I do (did).
Most Mp3's get compressed at a bitrate of 128 to save file size (keep them smaller, fit more songs on a disc)... I don't know that you would as easily be able to hear the difference between mp3 and .wav (pcm) if it was less compressed at a higher bitrate, etc... 256 or more. One just can't keep as many songs on one 700mb data disc then...
The simple answer is that mp3 will likely sound 'worse' than you're used to... the very definition of 'worse' hinges on detail... it's not like you're copying to cassette tape where you're now introducing noise... They aren't noisy (hiss) compared to the originals...
We know that. He was just saying he wants a cd player that plays mp3s.
Originally Posted by JohnnyToronto
We know that. He was just saying he wants a cd player that plays mp3s.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
algee
Install related
15
Sep 18, 2011 06:44 PM
scotiacustom
General Discussion
20
Mar 1, 2007 05:17 PM
sexybmw
General Discussion
22
May 12, 2006 02:36 PM
