[taylor]

Quote:

Originally posted by pbirkett Explain how. It is an identical copy of the original disc which means it is not lossy. Lossy compared to a real analogue sound perhaps, but it is not a lossy format.

The original disc was lossy. It's been comrpessed down to 16-bit 44.1KHz, whilst the original recordings were higher quality than that.

 

[aphex944]

If you hear a difference(or rather, if you "think" you hear a difference), there is, even if you're the only one that can recognize it! There isn't a reference human auditory system, we can only go by our own, as we all perceive things differently. I have zero doubt I can hear a difference between a LAME "extreme" MP3 and the original WAV. I get along much better with MPC. MP3s to me have a compressed soundstage, and while most detail is retained in good encodings, there are enough small mishaps to mess with the entire feel of the track.

While blind testing definitely has it purposes, and I really like the concept behind them, but I know I don't do well with them. Reason being, I always tend to concentrate on ONE aspect of the recording, and I end up ignoring other things that may be present. With enough practice I guess I'd be able to change this, but I think the mindset one gets into is a flaw of the ABX system.

I trust my own ears enough to tell a difference as well. I'm always skeptical of things in audio. I 100% wholeheartedly believed way back in 1998 that my Xing 192kbps MP3s were CD quality. That was, until I heard a LAME MP3. I said to myself, alright, this has GOT to be it. Then I tried MPC. Then I tried lossless. Then I got a new soundcard, etc etc.

If all things were as easy as blind testing, there'd be "the best" headphones and speakers out there, but as you know, it's not that simple. Theoretically, you should not be able to tell the difference between an MP3 that's had a 19.5khz lowpass. Theoretically, you shouldn't be able to tell a difference in opamps with "inaudible" differences, but people do. I've found the more you muck with audio, whether it be through compression or passing through several components, the more you'll notice it.

 

[rickcr42]

all i can add to this is

all you people that beleive MP3 is the equal of the Cd deserve a future where that will be your only choice (sounds identical right ?) and instead of purchasing a Cd for $12, downloading the singles for a buck

a bargain until you want the entire album and it has thirty songs !

but of course you will no longer have that option

and when the artists realize they no longer have to compile a group of songs for an album but just one for download there will be the end of that

instead of waiting for the new album release we will be waiting for the new song

not a stretch

the big labels always focus on the bottom line and what will pass to the buying public

mostly teens who have crapty systems and low expectations but are satisfied not having any comparison

If it is only the minority demanding high quality we are doomed

 

[Earwax]

Quote:

Originally posted by rickcr42 I would rather see a new analog hi-res format

I've never completely understood why reel to reel tape didn't catch on as a audiophile distribution media.

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally posted by rickcr42 If it is only the minority demanding high quality we are doomed

We're doomed!

-Ed

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

I've never completely understood why reel to reel tape didn't catch on as a audiophile distribution media.

was never about the sound quality but the inconvenience

Same reason why Cd replced vinyl and possibly MP3 replacing the CD as the medium of music delivery

poor us , each step forward is a step backward

the means of delivery ( amp/cans) advance while the medium does not deserve the system

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

If it is only the minority demanding high quality we are doomed

Relax.Minority in this case means maybe 20 million relatively wealthy audiophiles worldwide and majority means 300 million MTV-hooked teenagers with their small pocket money.
Two huge markets, both will prosper.

Some information about the publisher of the original article:
C't is a german computer magazine with a wide range of topics.
It's clearly the best magazine here for those who are into the details of their systems.
If you have any questions regarding this MP3 versus Redbook listening test maybe head-fi member Lini can help you out, C't is his employer.

 

[Edwood]

Yeah, if the RIAA would push for superior Hi-Res formats more and more, they would have a very unlikely ally on their side.

But instead they want to f#ck everybody.

-Ed

 

[Joe Bloggs]

You're all doomed

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

Yeah, if the RIAA would push for superior Hi-Res formats more and more, they would have a very unlikely ally on their side.

I am a big fan of balance , no "one size fits all' here folks


In my humble (me humble

) old guy seen it all opinion all formats are valid and can thrive side by side

it is the crew that touts one as the "be all end all' format that gets my undies tight to the pain point

As i stated earlier i come from the all analog dys of audio and not only did i not discriminate but used all equally according to need and function

LP vinyl disc ,eight track tape (real nightmare) ,cassete tape and open reel tape

The ultimate was the 15 IPS analog reel tape if you could get a first generation dub . Each succeeding generation deteriorates the sound and noise levels

So at one time it was open reel at 15 IPS for the ultimate but being young and wild it meant i had to be totally straight ,no mind altering substances or i could not thread the tape (hey ! it was the late 60s/early 70s folks !)

99% of home listening was the viny LP

car sound was the eight track later superceded by the cassette

portable was ,well ,NONE !

All you had was AM radio if you wanted jams at the beach or at a family picnic at a park

eventually 8 track portables showed up but they were never a serious high fidelity medium

did not stop us from using them though !

how else to shock the old folks at the gatherings unless you could whip out some grand funk and play it LOUD with all the distorions of the medium !

Like we even noticed how bad it sounded !

and if we did we did not care being young and not quite "there"

The casstte was a medium for dictation at one time and NOT a transport system for music

Advent Corporation changed all that with the introduction of a cassetee deck with fdolby NR !

OH YEAH BABY !

No ,not as good as the LP but DAMN GOOD !

Beat the 8 track down like a punk

So here i was stuck with 2000 8 tracks and the medium goes away over night !

You could not buy them or the or the players !

here today

[size=small]WHAMMO ![/size]

Gone !

But the cassette had two things the 8 track did not

1-pretty damn good sound

2-RECORDABILITY !

YEAH BABY ! YEAH !

But the RIAA had a fit and it almost did not happen


anyway ,happen it did so my proceedure was : buy the LP and record to cassette for the car/portable

That was another nenefit of the cassette

portability

around this time FM was beginning to broadcast actual music .

Mostly underground college stations and AOR rock was born (Album Oriented Rock)

Bye bye top forty AM ,HELOOOO HARD CORE

Now with the "all in one" boom box you had FM rock stations AND cassette tape which you cold either purchase prerecorded (nope ! losing thousands in the 8 track fiasco taught me a lesson) , "burn" from LP or even record entire albums late night !

Sony looked at the medium and shocked the world with the first headphone based portable system - the Sony Walkman

These little jewels sounded better than most home stereo systems unless you were rich enough to spend thousands , i was not .

Success was instant and the knockoff came out

If i remember correctly the Sony was only matched by the Aiwa portables

So now i had

1-LP for most listening and ALL prerecorded purchases

2-Open Reel for when i could either get a first generation dub or when i was having a party . LPs and a bunch of drunks don't mix so i would record a couple of hours at 3 1/4 IPS , thread the tape while sober ,hit play and FERGETABOUTIT !

Once the tape ended I would use option

3-Cassette tape !

In the car ,at the beach ,at work ,in the walkman ,non critical home use for the convenience,recording live performances from the radio (anyone remember "simulcasts ?),recording albums from the radio

FREEDOM !

but not the last word in ultimate sound resolution

so what does this have to do with crap you ask (if you are still with me

) ?

each of the above formats has a modern day "twin"

There is a niche and a use for each

But just like the argument of casstte is as good as open reel or vinyl back in the day

Do NOT even for a moment try to convince me that these formats are equal in sound

Good enough for the application but not equal


HAH !

This is one of the longest i have done in a while and i wonder how many stayed with my "rambling" all over the joint style

Any grammatical or spelling errors will just have to stay for eternity ,this bad boy is WAY too long for even me to read for error checking

Rickmonsterator suremus and grand poopah of all things important

 

[Stoner]

Quote:

Originally posted by Edwood We're doomed! -Ed

No thanks to Apple and their iTunes music store selling 128bit AAC.

Why can't they just sell AIFF format tracks.

 

[the terabyte]

Quote:

Originally posted by Stoner No thanks to Apple and their iTunes music store selling 128bit AAC. Why can't they just sell AIFF format tracks.

that would markedly raise the price per track due to obscene bandwidth costs (even though i'm sure they'd use a compressed lossless format instead). the only way around this would be to bring in heavy advertising, which doesnt seem like apple's style.

 

[AsuAmo76]

This original article omitted two important peaces of information:

- original recording labels
- the details of tester's preferences - their age, music preferences, home gears (if any).

If one says that he dumped well regarded here kind of blue into 256-mp3 file and could not tell the difference, can all of you reproduce it? No, we need more information - setup, phones etc.

If another says that he dumped 50c cd to mp3 and still can hear the difference - tons of headfiers will run to walmart to get such a value for their buck.

Can someone reproduce the original article findings?

On this forum I believe every one likes to see the proper reference. The Lame is great. Good! Name original cd, please! Please also mention, did you use NAD plugin or WAW or superbass or something else.

The original article is not even the bias. That's a joke.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

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

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

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

could you explain that for the metally challenged ?

Me ?