It's not placebo - or, it's placebo, but it's real!
Mar 6, 2008 at 11:15 PM Post #31 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by NajoBB /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I think it really depends how the music was recorded. I like how most cd's sound ripped in mp3, although i prefer lossless format (i did some very intensive a/b testing and it's definitely not placebo) but some records to my ear just don't sound good even at 320k mp3. Even if i had an ipod shuffle i'd still put some lossless music
in it.


Yes! I have a Shuffle and often do exactly that! I'll transcode a lossless ripped ALAC album in iTunes to WAV (Shuffles can't handle ALAC), and load it up. Most WAV albums chime in around 750 MB so my 1GB Shuffle can accommodate.

In fact, an 8GB nano (or my Touch) is really about all I need...I'm not one to carry my entire collection. Instead, I tote about 15-20 albums which probably were most recently purchased. Marillion, Pain of Salvation, and Dead Soul Tribe are not popular fare and once I've used up my own personal 'radio station' cuts they're generally done forever. I get burned out - point is I don't need 120 GB of space, probably closer to 10-12 GB, but even eight suffices for now.

The WAV album on the Shuffle (if it's a good recording) is awesome, blissful. As someone else stated, noticeable front-to-back depth and separation and scalability of volume. Pounding bass slam that never sounds tiring or one-dimensional. It's not placebo, and I don't have to prove that to know it.
 
Mar 6, 2008 at 11:19 PM Post #33 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by grawk /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm sure some of the hydrogen audio trolls are even participating


Only on Head-Fi would comments about common-sense objective testing automatically be considered a 'troll'...
 
Mar 6, 2008 at 11:22 PM Post #34 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by Night Surfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Several Random Thoughts:

If it gives you a warm fuzzy to sacrifice space and battery life to go lossless, even though a simple and easy test can put the matter to rest....more power to ya.

I think even after failing the test (like almost everyone (including myself) does) most of the losslessophiles would still use lossless "just to be sure" even after proving that it doesn't matter. Some may call that OCD, I say it's dedication
smily_headphones1.gif


Does anyone else sense the deeper correlation this silly argument has with cosmic life issues? I.E. the whole perception/reality, reality perception, Emperor wears no clothes, Appolo / Dionysus undertone? Just me? Thought so. Nevermind.


I prefer the Plato 'dudes in the cave' metaphor. To your point, this to me is not about testing/failing, even though virtually everyone who has failed believes 'everyone does'. This is about what I hear in the real world - not in some sonic lab or under controlled conditions using completely different sources. This IS life, and no one else lives between my ears (thankfully for everyone else).
 
Mar 6, 2008 at 11:57 PM Post #35 of 43
I used to stand on the mountain and preach lossless. My sermons put your puny arguments to shame.
Then I got a Kenwood HD30GB9. The kenwood will display format/bitrate with few button pushes.
I did an informal "experiment" just for fun: I loaded a bunch of random songs from my visiting brother's portable hard drive and played "guess the bitrate", fully confident in my ability to tell the difference between lowly lossy and holy lossless.
I did so poorly at that I decided to actually ABX (with volume leveling) myself because there just had to be some mistake.
Well.....I failed. Miserably, repeatedly.
I had to face facts: my ears were not so Golden as I once so proudly proclaimed.
I am now happy as a clam with 256 or V2/V1 (even though V4 is probably transparent....old habits are hard to break) and can put a lot more songs on my player now and have it last much longer between charges.
I am happy with it purely for one reason: I tested and tested to the point where the was no way to continue fooling myself.
I killed my placebo. Shot it dead.
Keep this in mind as well:
The testing was done a a decent system: way better than my Kenwood (as nice as the Kenwood was) so there is just no stinking way that I could justify lossless on a portable.
So now I believe that:
* putting lossless on a portable is just silly.
* I am skeptical of people who claim resolution without proper testing.
* Format is way down on the food chain of what is important to SQ: recording quality and headphones are WAY more important. Lossless will not make Californication sound better and Brothers in Arms will still sound great w/ Lame V5.
* The vast majority of people who actually test (and who are honest with themselves/others) also fail to resolve properly encoded lossy vs lossless.
* There are some exceptions, but these people have "trained" their ears to listen for particular "artifacts". All that really means is that they can tell the difference NOT that it is "better" or "worse".

Disclaimer: This was MY personal experience. I do not presume to imply that it should be extrapolated to include all of humanity.


Note: Once, because I am essentially evil, I did an informal test with an "audiophile" acquaintance. We tested 128mp3 vs WAV on my Kenwood with me telling him which ones were lossy or not.
He would actually wince when the MP3's were playing and positively bliss out w/ the FLAC. Problem is, I lied and reversed every song.
Laughed pretty hard about it after he left.
Never had the heart to tell him though.
 
Mar 7, 2008 at 12:04 AM Post #36 of 43
Here...I'll throw ya a bone...(this used to be one of my favorites).....even though your not worthy.......

Even if you can't tell the difference between Grey Goose and Smirnoff in a taste test, I can sure tell the difference between the hangovers when I drink the cheap crap. Why poison yourself?
 
Mar 7, 2008 at 12:07 AM Post #37 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by Night Surfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Several Random Thoughts:

If it gives you a warm fuzzy to sacrifice space and battery life to go lossless, even though a simple and easy test can put the matter to rest....more power to ya.

I think even after failing the test (like almost everyone (including myself) does) most of the losslessophiles would still use lossless "just to be sure" even after proving that it doesn't matter. Some may call that OCD, I say it's dedication
smily_headphones1.gif


Does anyone else sense the deeper correlation this silly argument has with cosmic life issues? I.E. the whole perception/reality, reality perception, Emperor wears no clothes, Appolo / Dionysus undertone? Just me? Thought so. Nevermind.


That's the reason i actually did the test. First, i was like " oh well, i'll just rip all my music in lossless just to be sure" . But when i downloaded an album from itunes (black holes and revelations from muse) i was hearing some really strange distortions. It wasn't only a little lower quality, it was really painful to listen. Than i bought the same album on cd and it sounded so different that every person that have healthy ears could tell the difference. After that i did the a/b test whit many of my cd's listening first in lossless, than mp3, than lossless again.....With some it was easy to find the difference, with others there was not that much difference at all. So, now i rip my music in lossless if i can have some real benefit from it. If not, 320k mp3 is more than enough (for electronic music mostly). But in the end, if people don't want to waste they're time for this stuff and have less than 300 cd collection,they can always just take an 160gb ipod, and rip it all in apple lossless. But then they'll never know if they can tell the difference...
biggrin.gif

PS: Yeah, i know......still learning English
 
Mar 7, 2008 at 12:55 AM Post #38 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by Night Surfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I used to stand on the mountain and preach lossless. My sermons put your puny arguments to shame....I am now happy as a clam with 256 or V2/V1 (even though V4 is probably transparent....old habits are hard to break) and can put a lot more songs on my player now and have it last much longer between charges.
I am happy with it purely for one reason: I tested and tested to the point where the was no way to continue fooling myself.....


Oh Hi priest of the Fi, I am ashamed. I could not possibly argue your clams to be spurious. And no one should want to dismiss your satisfaction with file transparency after such diligent and scientific analysis.

But the people in the cave saw only their own shadows after the blindfolds were removed, the shimmering image of which was cast upon the wall in front of them by the fire behind them. And it was only after their bindings were gone that their science showed them that the fire was the true reality. That is until someone opened the door to the cave and sunlight burst in.
 
Mar 7, 2008 at 1:07 AM Post #39 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by vranswer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Oh Hi priest of the Fi, I am ashamed. I could not possibly argue your clams to be spurious. And no one should want to dismiss your satisfaction with file transparency after such diligent and scientific analysis.

But the people in the cave saw only their own shadows after the blindfolds were removed, the shimmering image of which was cast upon the wall in front of them by the fire behind them. And it was only after their bindings were gone that their science showed them that the fire was the true reality. That is until someone opened the door to the cave and sunlight burst in.


Science Shmience.

If I don't know I can't tell so I don't care. Simple.

Erm....the cave story actually actually validates......nevermind.
 
Mar 7, 2008 at 1:18 AM Post #40 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by vranswer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
In fact, an 8GB nano (or my Touch) is really about all I need...I'm not one to carry my entire collection. Instead, I tote about 15-20 albums which probably were most recently purchased. Marillion, Pain of Salvation, and Dead Soul Tribe are not popular fare and once I've used up my own personal 'radio station' cuts they're generally done forever. I get burned out - point is I don't need 120 GB of space, probably closer to 10-12 GB, but even eight suffices for now.


We definitely differ here. I love it when something that I haven't heard for a year, or more, pops up on shuffle. I need as much as possible on my iPod. I do have playlists of recent purchases among others, but mostly, I shuffle by album.


I originally ripped everything to MP3 or AAC. I'm slowly reripping everything to lossless for archive purposes. So far I've ripped 548 albums to lossless. That's 157 GB and only about a third of my music collection. With what I've already ripped, there isn't a portable available to contain it all. I currently have an 80GB iPod and it's driving me crazy. Everything on it is music I really like, but every time I buy a new CD, I have to delete something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top