[AsuAmo76]

Quote:

The quality of a recording does not correlate well to the ability of listeners to distinguish an mp3 copy from the original.

Quote:

could you explain that for the metally challenged ?

At least how I understand it.

If you create:
group A - 50 worst cd you can find. They are cheap at least. group B - 50 cd in 5-7$ range.
group C - 50 cd of well reputable labels (telurc, teldec, add yours)
group D - 50 sacd and/or dvd-audio.

No correlation:
Assuming in a group A you could distinguish between mp3 files and cd-s in, let's say 45 or 75 or whatever %. The similar statistical results are in groups B, C and D.

"Does not correlate well":
The opposite for some cases - for example, results in group D lower than in B and C, but still higher than those in A.

 

[rickcr42]

seems to me "garbage in = garbage out" is realist

If you compare crap to crap it is only a matter of how bad the stench is in the end .

good program material into a good system will be obvious

blind or not

 

[AsuAmo76]

That means that quality of a recording does correlate well to the ability of listeners to distinguish an mp3 copy from the original.

I personally agree, even though Joe Bloggs has different opinion.

 

[rickcr42]

not what i personally hear at all

the better the original the more noticeable the differences between it and the compressed copy

of course this is on a system that resolves low level detail well and has a wide dynamic range-the difference between soft music and loud peaks

 

[eyeteeth]

I've believed what i've read of subjective listening tests of different bit-rates in the fairly recent positive reviews of the i-Pod in Stereophile's report and Positive-Feedback's report .

ST: "The audiophile in me began to pay attention at 192kbps."

"The compressed formats began to show some real promise at 320kbps."

"At this rate, differences between the two formats jumped into sharper focus: MP3 made transients "splashy," while AAC just sounded anemic compared to the original. With both formats, dynamic variation was considerably reduced compared to the CD."

PF: "Some years ago, a German audio group conducted a study on the audio performance of compression standards and how they stack up to CDs and LPs."

"In some cases, the effects of compression were audible even in 256kps, yet in other instances, the effects were almost nonexistent."

This debate is even less interesting than upsampling.

rickcr42,
the 8-track memory that makes me smile is of a song, half played fading out to silence followed by the thick "cluck" of channel change (or whatever it was) and the song fading back in to continue and finish. Funny.

 

[rickcr42]

the really cool thing is being old enough (

) to actually be able to compare practically every single so called hi fidelity medium ever invented !

from 78/33.33/45 rpm vinyl to recordable CD and everything in between,both analog and digital

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally posted by rickcr42 the really cool thing is being old enough ( ) to actually be able to compare practically every single so called hi fidelity medium ever invented ! from 78/33.33/45 rpm vinyl to recordable CD and everything in between,both analog and digital

I've heard them all, but on playback systems that were not good, which was the norm for us in the suburban 70's. We didn't make comparisons between formats or equipment at the time due to youth and the fun at hand. It would have been like comparing refrigerators.

But I didn't hear one of the lost formats which was supposed to have been a legitimate contender- DAT (digital audio tape).

 

[Geek]

That's a pretty darned good study. Since the score between 256k MP3 and CD was equal, points wise, tied at 501 points each, it's statistically a tie. There is a margin of error, of course, but this clearly shows that individuals had difficulty picking the CD quality sample over .mp3. Also, some listeners even chose the .mp3 over the CD, claiming it sounded better!

I personally can hear a modest difference between .mp3s and CD on my RME card, but I hear a magnificent difference between those same CDs played through my soundcard and those CDs played through a good CDP with the same source/amp combo.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[pbirkett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek but I hear a magnificent difference between those same CDs played through my soundcard and those CDs played through a good CDP with the same source/amp combo.

Quote:

Originally posted by pbirkett What I disagree with, is the people who say the differences are MASSIVE. When they clearly arent. People have a habit of exagerrating what they say they can hear. Even if some people say they heard a difference, they will automatically say its a massive difference. Its just the way audiophiles are.

I rest my case

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

I personally can hear a modest difference between .mp3s and CD on my RME card, but I hear a magnificent difference between those same CDs played through my soundcard and those CDs played through a good CDP with the same source/amp combo.

I get a bit confused here.It's no question that different sources sound different.Did you expand MP3s to redbook and have you auditioned them in comparison through your fabulous CDP?
Blind?Doubleblind?
BTW, what is a ``good´´ CDP?In the past few weeks I was A/B testing a few Redbook players against RME pad.The CDPs I found in my hood were from 200 up to 1000 bucks, and the RME was at least at the same quality level.
Please don't tell me there is a distinct superiority in a Redbook player at an affordable prize, let's say less than 1000.
Oh my wallet.Even that I call ``less than 1000´´ affordable .......

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

But I didn't hear one of the lost formats which was supposed to have been a legitimate contender- DAT (digital audio tape).

another little tidbit from "Ricks Mental Archives" is the little known fact that Radio shack had one of the first if not the first consumer DAT recorders.

Price was reasonable as was the performance

I also would suggest using VHS Hi-Fi as a serious high fidelity recroding medium ,no kidding ,really !



Quote:

We didn't make comparisons between formats or equipment at the time due to youth and the fun at hand. It would have been like comparing refrigerators

we had a couple of spoiled brats in our group that had anything and everything they wanted so access to high quality was there

early on it was AR or Klipsch or KEF loudspeakers with dyna or tubed marantz electronics

later the Thoebe/Ampzilla/Dahlquist/Janis was the system to beat with Ampex open reel , Nakimichi cassette and AR turntable with Grace arm and F9 cartridge

no ,i could not afford such on my salary but guess where we held all our parties !

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

That's a pretty darned good study. Since the score between 256k MP3 and CD was equal, points wise, tied at 501 points each, it's statistically a tie. There is a margin of error, of course, but this clearly shows that individuals had difficulty picking the CD quality sample over .mp3. Also, some listeners even chose the .mp3 over the CD, claiming it sounded better!

as i stated earlier in this thread ,the trend towards proving the viability of the MP3 in relation to the CD format is a dangerous one

One that if enough people buy into it will spell the end of the Cd as we know it today if the big labels think they can get away with pushing this on us without a choice

and they never give us a choice ,not ever

Let the market decide ?

When the CD was coming up the labels already stated the commitment to the format and announced they would no longer produce the vinyl LP for new music

they never asked the consumer just stated the digital medium was "perfect" and pretty much said the Cd could be used as a frisbee without affecting the playability so why would anyone want an inferior 'record album" which coulsd be damaged and made unplayable so easily ?

They in effect force fed the Cd to the consumer without ever asking if we ,the ones spening the loot wanted in

A future where only MP3 is used for new music is not one that makes me comfortable

You can rip a Cd to MP3 and , according to what you hear as some have stated in this thread is all over the map ,have an inferior copy of the original but a musically satisfying copy under the right circumstances

But once it is MP3 or nothing and the format is copy protected what would the future copies then be ?

The original would already be something less than we have presently

Electronics and headphones/loudspeakers seek to squeeze the last bit of resolution out of a medium then the medium goes AM Radio on us !

At this time there are labels dealing specifically with the high end crowd and they produce superior recordings in both vinyl and Cd but at a cost ,no free rides.

but what happens when there IS NO superior copy to make the audiophile copy from ?

would they then just turn to "no name " bands ?

scares the beegeezers out me to even think of an mp3 future

 

[pbirkett]

Rickcr42, that is one of the most well made points I've seen, and so true. Despite the fact I admit that MP3 can be pretty good, and other formats can be even better, I dont think I would be wanting to buy my *original* music in these formats. How can others be trusted to do it right?

 

[kunwar]

the finest format for lossy coding out there is Musepack by far and somehow I can still tell the difference between the WAV and the musepack file.
A common problem with all lossy formats is that the background or shall we say the back end of the music disappears.
I have A-Bed so many songs and have gotten my friends to do it as well and almost every time i can tell a difference.
i am perfectly happy with the lossy format while travelling but it does not make any sense to listen to them at home
I will stick to my CD's

Just my opinion.

 

[ITZBITZ]

Quote:

Originally posted by rickcr42 I also would suggest using VHS Hi-Fi as a serious high fidelity recroding medium ,no kidding ,really ! [/B]

OMG, don't tell me that Rick and I agree. In the late 80's, the HI-FI VCR (Mitsubishi U70) was significantly higher fidelity than my Nakamichi Dragon cassette deck. The flying heads were more reliable and the dynamic range was much better. So much so that I used them with my Linn Helix speakers at the time recording directly from vinyl or CD.

It was great at parties, six-hour mix tapes.