[gregorio]

enjoying music happens independent of its fidelity.

like you, i love the sound of a great cassette player (like a nakamichi) through an old tube receiver. i also love the sound through my super high-end stack.

If music enjoyment is “independent of fidelity” why would you have a Nakamichi or a super high-end stack? Wouldn’t you get the same enjoyment from the cheapest, lowest fidelity reproduction system you could find?

71dB did not say enjoyment is independent from fidelity, he said he can still enjoy some music at lower fidelity, not the same thing at all! Sure, it’s possible to still enjoy some pieces of music at low fidelity but in many/most cases it’s possible to enjoy it even more at high fidelity.

G

 

[LisaShayBrown]

If music enjoyment is “independent of fidelity” why would you have a Nakamichi or a super high-end stack? Wouldn’t you get the same enjoyment from the cheapest, lowest fidelity reproduction system you could find?

71dB did not say enjoyment is independent from fidelity, he said he can still enjoy some music at lower fidelity, not the same thing at all! Sure, it’s possible to still enjoy some pieces of music at low fidelity but in many/most cases it’s possible to enjoy it even more at high fidelity.

G

all i said was enjoyment (meaning the simple ability to enjoy it) is independent of fidelity. i said nothing about degree or character of the enjoyment. which is obviously different based on what ultimately gets to the air.

but i agree with you, probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment. but it's also very situation-dependent. like cranking the tunes in on a mono fm radio in a convertible going down the beach road - low fidelity, very high enjoyment.

 

[Ghoostknight]

exactly. anyone who can't hear the difference between .wav or .flac and .mp3 96k should have their hearing checked (seriously).

there are too many variables to make a statement like this tho...
1. what equipment you use (i generally have problems to hear differences with my DT880/Headphones vs my speaker setup, not just for mp3 vs flac tho)
2. is it heavly "eq`d"
3. are you sensitive to it (or made quite a few A/B tests to notice the differences)
4. what codecs
5. how willing you are to make sacrifices, i generally avoid that if its easy avoidable
6. how your ears are doing
and probably more

instead of coming to a "common point" imo everyone should try lossy vs lossless themself (since there are too many variables) to figure out if they need/want lossless or not
(kinda the same goes for mp3 vs aac)

 

[LisaShayBrown]

there are too many variables to make a statement like this tho...
1. what equipment you use (i generally have problems to hear differences with my DT880/Headphones vs my speaker setup, not just for mp3 vs flac tho)
2. is it heavly "eq`d"
3. are you sensitive to it (or made quite a few A/B tests to notice the differences)
4. what codecs
5. how willing you are to make sacrifices, i generally avoid that if its easy avoidable
6. how your ears are doing
and probably more

instead of coming to a "common point" imo everyone should try lossy vs lossless themself (since there are too many variables) to figure out if they need/want lossless or not
(kinda the same goes for mp3 vs aac)

true, lots of variables involved. i probably couldn't tell 96 kbps .mp3 from 44.1/16 if played over the phone, say.

 

[gregorio]

instead of coming to a "common point" imo everyone should try lossy vs lossless themself (since there are too many variables) to figure out if they need/want lossless or not
(kinda the same goes for mp3 vs aac)

That’s only true up to a point though. Beyond that point it doesn’t matter what the variables are, how good your system, your hearing or listen skills. So, by all means try low bit rate lossy vs lossless if you are particularly short of storage space, otherwise at say 256VBR AAC or MP3 Lame, there’s no point in trying.

G

 

[gregorio]

but i agree with you, probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment.

So enjoyment is not “independent of fidelity” then, there is a correlation?

G

 

[LisaShayBrown]

So enjoyment is not “independent of fidelity” then, there is a correlation?

G

yes, enjoyment is independent of fidelity in the sense that one can enjoy greatly on low fidelity equipment.

as for a correlation, that would require study to get a good answer about. both fidelity and enjoyment are way too multivariate to come to a simple conclusion.

 

[Ghoostknight]

So, by all means try low bit rate lossy vs lossless if you are particularly short of storage space, otherwise at say 256VBR AAC or MP3 Lame, there’s no point in trying.

im also talking about 256/320 kbit common codecs like spotify/youtube/netflix etc not just low bit rates
im not sure if i ever tried the specific codecs you mentioned but im wondering if 10 years ago people said the same about 192kbit mp3 and so on...

 

[gregorio]

yes, enjoyment is independent of fidelity in the sense that one can enjoy greatly on low fidelity equipment.

Either “enjoyment is independent of fidelity” OR they’re correlated: “probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment.” - Which are you claiming?

as for a correlation, that would require study to get a good answer about.

So you’re saying that this: “probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment.” - Wasn’t a good answer?

both fidelity and enjoyment are way too multivariate to come to a simple conclusion.

Enjoyment is but fidelity isn’t.

G

 

[gregorio]

im wondering if 10 years ago people said the same about 192kbit mp3

Yes, they did. Of course some audiophiles didn’t but then some still say there’s an obvious audible difference between 256VBR AAC and MP3 Lame. If I remember correctly, the threshold was about 180kbps MP3 Lame 10 years ago.

G

 

[LisaShayBrown]

Either “enjoyment is independent of fidelity” OR they’re correlated: “probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment.” - Which are you claiming?

"probably" is not a claim, it's a supposition.

So you’re saying that this: “probably by and large the better the fidelity, the more the enjoyment.” - Wasn’t a good answer?

no, because "probably" denotes conjecture.

Enjoyment is but fidelity isn’t.

G

fidelity is multivariate too. many, many factors can go wrong and reduce fidelity. each factor may or may not have a bearing on enjoyment, depending on the musical content and the listener's preferences. i may not care if I can't hear the bass on an ella fitzgerald recording, or i may not care if a film score is overly compressed (i may even appreciate that if listening in my car). i may not mind if the .mp3 encoding smears the makes the high end on a high-hat track too sizzly as long as the groove stays good.

 

[gregorio]

probably" is not a claim, it's a supposition. …
no, because "probably" denotes conjecture.

So you’re saying your supposition/conjecture was wrong?

fidelity is multivariate too. many, many factors can go wrong and reduce fidelity.

But in practice those potential “many, many factors” do not go wrong and reduce fidelity. User error and the accuracy of HP or speakers/room acoustics are the only things that go wrong with consumer playback.

i may not care if I can't hear the bass on an ella fitzgerald recording …

So you’re effectively saying the same thing again. Will you enjoy it more at higher fidelity (with bass) or don’t you care, in which case there’s no point in any audio reproduction kit beyond the cheapest/lowest fidelity.

G

 

[LisaShayBrown]

So you’re saying your supposition/conjecture was wrong?

is that what I said? doesn't seem to be remotely like what i said.

But in practice those potential “many, many factors” do not go wrong and reduce fidelity. User error and the accuracy of HP or speakers/room acoustics are the only things that go wrong with consumer playback.

that's an extraordinary claim. i assume you have lots of evidence for it?

So you’re effectively saying the same thing again. Will you enjoy it more at higher fidelity (with bass) or don’t you care, in which case there’s no point in any audio reproduction kit beyond the cheapest/lowest fidelity.

G

i may enjoy it more at higher fidelity, but i may not (ask anyone who prefers tubes or who puts tissues over the tweeters of ns-10s).

 

[bigshot]

totally agreed and i think you raise a new very important point: enjoying music happens independent of its fidelity. like you, i love the sound of a great cassette player (like a nakamichi) through an old tube receiver. i also love the sound through my super high-end stack. though it's taken a while to get used to it because the separation and staging is so good that it gives the brain a ton to process. i've had to learn to settle back and ignore the zillions of details and simply let my brain cohere it all into one powerful experience.

I personally don't have nostalgia for noise, I love music. I'm able to listen past noise... hearing an acoustic 78 of Caruso on a vintage phonograph gives me goosebumps... but would I go back in a time machine with a digital recorder to record him properly if I could? You better believe it!

I grew up with tape hiss, inner groove distortion, generation loss and surface noise. Back then, I wished I had all music on reel to reel at 7.5 ips so I wouldn't have to deal with it. Now I have CDs and I actually don't have to deal with it any more. I'm not going back. I don't feel all warm and fuzzy having to preen a record with a velvet before playing it. I don't enjoy figuring out how to use dolby encoding to get the results I like, and I don't like having to research which pressing of a record is the one that messes it up the least.

My dream when I was back in middle school was to be able to carry around my whole music collection in my pocket with perfect sound. AAC 256 VBR achieves that. The teenage me would have been over the moon with happiness. Sometimes the adult me has to pinch myself and remind myself how good we've got it today.

 

[bigshot]

the better the MUSIC, the more the enjoyment.

FTFY

Fidelity just provides accuracy, and if not sufficient, it can reduce enjoyment. But all of the enjoyment in listening to music comes from the music, not the machine you're playing it on. Audiophiles forget that all the time and ascribe creative descriptive terms to wires and diodes that should actually be used to describe artists and their work.