Originally Posted by Steve Eddy
When you say j_j, do you mean jj as in James Johnston formerly of Bell Labs?
EDIT: Never mind, found him. It is ol' jj.
Yes, of course being a scientist doesn't make a person infallible, but if I'm to take anybody's word, then the CV is certainly impressive. As is the capacity to patiently explain and put into layman, even non-mathematical, terms. Read some of his stuff on Hydrogen Audio too.
Monty, of Xiph, still gets the credit for opening my eyes, though.
Hey, I'm over sixty years old: why did nobody tell me all this stuff long, long ago! . Oh well, better late than never!
Originally Posted by BeyerMonster
Out of curiosity, do you have the same attitude towards vendors selling 256 kbps or even 128 kbps MP3s as CD-quality or "near CD-quality"?
I hadn't really thought about that one. I don't really buy MP3, or any lossy audio, if I can help it,so the question hasn't arisen. Off-hand, no. It isn't such a fabrication as the high-res marketing.
In the case of lossless high-res audio case, you can at least argue that their production and distribution costs are higher (storage/bandwidth).
In the lossless cases, they're actually saving money via lower costs/bandwidth.
When I am buying music, I would buy FLAC rather than MP3. I don't object to the higher cost for the reasons you state.
Arguments for/against audible differences can be applied in either scenario.
I believe that there are many reasons why two sound samples could sound different on the same system, before even getting into the statements of pure faith which inspire so many to become "high res" evangelists.
In the first place, we have the people who heard some high-bit-rate music and declared it marvellous, without listening to a 44.1 copy of the same thing. In the second, we people who declare it marvellous because on one DAC in one system, they detected a difference. Many of these people will decry any sort of blind testing, formal or informal too, but even if the second group genuinely did hear something, it is no basis for a universal conclusion.
Me? Old[ish] and with diminishing hearing that rolls off from 8K, so if someone points me at a tiny, tiny variation in the decay of some cymbal shimmer (assuming that it did exist), well, I probably didn't get most of that shimmer anyway.
I can still talk, though!
Edited by Thad-E-Ginathom - 5/4/14 at 2:58am