So if you buy a new car and the dealer gives you free sunroof leather seats push start button tinted windows climate control you'd just say nah there is no difference to my driving experience I don't want it
So if you buy a new car and the dealer gives you free sunroof leather seats push start button tinted windows climate control you'd just say nah there is no difference to my driving experience I don't want it
If you like to EQ up the bass and you cant pick a difference between loss less and compressed buying high end gear would be a waste of money IMO
Obviously there is a difference between loss less and compressed and to claim that it cannot be heard is frankly ridiculous
If you can reliably hear the difference and identify a lossless format from 320 kbps in a double blind test I'll eat my shoe.
Nobody is claiming that lossless and lossy formats are inherently the same, the argument is that the human ear cannot detect the differences between those two formats in any reliable and consistent way.
If you can reliably hear the difference and identify a lossless format from 320 kbps in a double blind test I'll eat my shoe.
Nobody is claiming that lossless and lossy formats are inherently the same, the argument is that the human ear cannot detect the differences between those two formats in any reliable and consistent way.
If you're truly interested, look up the work of Jim Johnston at ATT labs. That's who developed the MP3. ATT constructed a true DBT facility, the tests were conducted after listener training, blah, blah, blah, and the results are there.
FWIW, Jim, himself, doesn't think the MP3 is suitable for music, but you guys obviously know better.
If you're truly interested, look up the work of Jim Johnston at ATT labs. That's who developed the MP3. ATT constructed a true DBT facility, the tests were conducted after listener training, blah, blah, blah, and the results are there.
FWIW, Jim, himself, doesn't think the MP3 is suitable for music, but you guys obviously know better.
If you're truly interested, look up the work of Jim Johnston at ATT labs. That's who developed the MP3. ATT constructed a true DBT facility, the tests were conducted after listener training, blah, blah, blah, and the results are there.
FWIW, Jim, himself, doesn't think the MP3 is suitable for music, but you guys obviously know better.
He helped develop it. It's entirety is credited to the Fraunhofer Institute's Mr. Brandenburg who worked closely with James and other engineers to develop the codec in a joint team. As far as I know.
He helped develop it. It's entirety is credited to the Fraunhofer Institute's Mr. Brandenburg who worked closely with James and other engineers to develop the codec in a joint team. As far as I know.
The point is, DTB results already exist and have been available for years.
If you'd like to ask JJ about his direct participation in the development of the MP3, shoot me a PM and I'll refer you to a forum where you can talk to him. He's not shy.
This all also kinda ignores the fact that, regardless of the initial development of it, the compression codecs have advanced immensely in the years since. Even that 2009 study isn't entirely valid because the algorithms keep progressing. What we have at our disposal in 2014 is wildly different. Back in the day the mp3s you downloaded off Napster sounded like crap compared to the CD. Now there's no perceivable difference, and even the 128kbps sounds far clearer.
The point is, DTB results already exist and have been available for years.
If you'd like to ask JJ about his direct participation in the development of the MP3, shoot me a PM and I'll refer you to a forum where you can talk to him. He's not shy.
If you can reliably hear the difference and identify a lossless format from 320 kbps in a double blind test I'll eat my shoe.
Nobody is claiming that lossless and lossy formats are inherently the same, the argument is that the human ear cannot detect the differences between those two formats in any reliable and consistent way.
Would you like fries with that
This thread is about high end gear and with high end gear 320 vs lossless is clear no training required
I find the "I can't pick a difference therefore know one can" argument quite strange. I can't speak Chinese or fly a fighter jet but I would not claim these things were impossible
Looking back in the thread the difference camp appear to be describing a similar grain effect with 320 each in their own words this alone would suggest something is detectable
I think the real debate is about performance potential, does the potential of the top tier headphones match 320kps
I don't think so, in my experience 320kps tops out at around HD650 level go higher and you hear the grain
Of course there is no restriction in supply of top line headphones so if you want to spend $1500 and run crap through them no harm done
I watched a video review yesterday of a guy running his HD800 out of a smart phone he was happy
Because after test after test, study after study, it's been proven. You claim to be able to tell, but that's like being able to tell the difference between HDMI cables. It's not true. You can't. Audiophiles have failed over and over and over again. Maybe one in a million can, but that's it. It's like being able to claim you can tell the difference between minute hex code colors or different resolutions on a smartphone above 400ppi. you can't.
Would you like fries with that
This thread is about high end gear and with high end gear 320 vs lossless is clear no training required
I find the "I can't pick a difference therefore know one can" argument quite strange. I can't speak Chinese or fly a fighter jet but I would not claim these things were impossible
Looking back in the thread the difference camp appear to be describing a similar grain effect with 320 each in their own words this alone would suggest something is detectable
I think the real debate is about performance potential, does the potential of the top tier headphones match 320kps
I don't think so, in my experience 320kps tops out at around HD650 level go higher and you hear the grain
Of course there is no restriction in supply of top line headphones so if you want to spend $1500 and run crap through them no harm done
I watched a video review yesterday of a guy running his HD800 out of a smart phone he was happy
In normal listening? Or when you're specifically listening for it? And even if in normal listening, is "hearing it just about" going to affect your listening pleasure that much? Just as with the difference between two good quality phones (only much less), once you've been listening for a few minutes you automatically adjust to the difference.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
