Found this on YouTube...

https://youtu.be/YgEjI5PZa78

I'm not going to argue with this guy ... but MP3s on my system sound somewhat flat and lifeless. I'm not a can guy myself, doubt I could evaluate anything with headphones, as I'm used to hearing the soundstage of 3-way speakers placed 8' apart. This, IMO, is where MP3s start to unravel; bass is mushy (a rush of wind but not solid), voices thin, treble harsh, pacing off, and with a confused soundstage. Perhaps this is all in my head, I don't really care, I just wouldn't be happy knowing that I'm listening to 20 percent of the original sound track.

I can tolerate his views, as they make a certain amount of sense. What really gets to me is people who think that spending more than 300 bux on an audio system are wasting their money, as there is no actual improvement to be had.

While we are at it, I think I'll dig out my 2.1 megapixel camera ... I mean with today's mentality, why even bother aiming for quality in anything, all the kids are so used to mediocre everything, and they don't care that they are unable to spell or compose a sentence properly.

If much of today's English speaking population is unable to discern when to correctly employ the words "there", "their" and "they're" ... who cares? They all sound the same anyway ...

Actually I posted this test about a month ago, and I don't recall anyone scoring a perfect 6/6.

There is ONE point this guy makes about recording producers being in their 40's-50's-60's. They are mixing music with hampered hearing.

Now, the irony is that for many of us, by the time you are able to afford some of your dream equipment (meaning also expensive), we are also in the same situation of not being able to hear the whole thing, especially high frequencies.

This is one of the faults with this exercise, sound quality is not only a matter of high frequencies, although the difference in frequency does show this.

But this guy has a point.

Now the following comment was made by the previous poster: "What really gets to me is people who think that spending more than 300 bux on an audio system are wasting their money"

Well...it depends.

High-end audio is also about exclusivity, style, pride of ownership, cabinet styling, ergonomics, you know what I mean. It is also about music, performance and the "there" and goosebump factor.

For those who spend strictly for music performance, I have to admit that yes, past a certain point, the extra dollars spent is a waste of money - considering hearing loss and whatever.

But, just as there are so many variables we consider important, if you feel it is worth it, then it is.

Just did the test and scored 6/6. You can tell the difference especially when picking out the drums/cymbols.
The difference in clarity is night and day. Fun test to take!

http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2 ... io-quality

_________________
My View of me - Audiophile on a mission!!!
Wife's View of me - Audiophile on a budget!!!

Got 6/6 as well....on my ipad speakers...first try!! Obviously this test "proves" nada

-- 16 Oct 2017 23:49 --

Hint: I cheated

The best reply is in the comments section.

"I'm an audiophile.... I'm not allowed within 500 yards of good music"

I have found that the quality of the recording (or mastering) is more important than the format. I have heard some newer mp3's that sound better than older CD's. I have also heard many flac files streamed on my Bluesound through my dac sound better than their hi res version.

That being said, I have come to listen to enjoy rather than analyze and dissect. I am far less critical than I used to be and am enjoying more music too. If a component makes one recording sound better and another one sound much worse it is not welcome in my system. I missed out on too much good music in the past to pursue much of this nonsense. Part of the reason its a dying hobby.

Restraining order?

_________________
(Ken Hotte, of) Teo Audio

Audiophobe?

My Sirius radio is connected to the stereo with an excellent Audioquest Sydney cable and the antenna is an upgrade as well. It sometimes amazes me how good it can sound, despite it's limits. But then I switch over to a vinyl record, CD, or even internet radio and the sound gets a whole lot better and, with the right recording, comes alive. However "lo-fi" signals and gear provide an opening into the audio world and for some it will be the bait into the consumer trap which we cherish.

The guy in the video hasn’t got a clue. MP3 has had its day in the lime light. It is no longer needed with todays tech. We are well beyond 56k modems and 500MB hard drives. Offering your music in anything under red book quality based on the fact people of age cannot hear above said frequencies is like saying all you need to eat is McDonalds cause it covers the essential food groups. What a moron! Take recorded material from any one of the recording technicians mentioned in that video and I will guarantee you will find musical information above 14Khz

As for the test between MP3 of different value vs WAV. If the music is unknow to the listener he/she will have difficult/impossible time trying to differentiate. A base line must formed first. The algorithm works differently depending on the complexity of the music. One may easily be able to detect differences using a known piano score but cannot detect differences with say a pop song that has a lot of dynamic compression. The test is flawed.

Well, it may have proved you got lucky with the test

-- 17 Oct 2017 10:54 --



I also agree that the quality of recording can surpass format. I have an XRCD version on Mighty Sam McClain - Give it yo to Love cd. The clarity and emotional impact of this cd beats every other version I own, including high-Rez download and even LP record.

I agree with this. We may or may not be able to tell the difference between a 320kb/s .mp3 or a .wav file on any consistent basis, but I would think that we all can notice the lack of dynamic range present in brickwalled recordings, especially those often mentioned in talk of "the loudness wars".

I found this interesting on Tidal

http://tidal.com/ca/video/lossless-explained

+1
bob on

BINGO! We are so caught up with the lossy vs lossless that we neglect to see the real problem with quality playback – excessive dynamic compression!

Another member opened a thread in interest of a particular artist(s). I own recordings of said artist in 24 bit 44.1 khz and confirmed the sample rate through a spectrogram. However, the music is so dynamically compressed it is pretty much unlistenable! Even with the most SOTA equipment, it would be impossible to detect differences between 320 MP3 vs 24 bit WAV. The engineer behind these recordings should not be allowed even near a recording studio never mind a console!

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=47904#p758774

I had an actual real chance once, to find out if I was an audiophile..or a music fanatic.

The house next door caught on fire, and was seriously ablaze. I found out about that, by someone pounding on the downstairs main door (three apartment three story Victorian house -I was at the top)..and waking me up. I get half way down the windowed staircase and see this blazing fire out the window at point blank range. I did not bother going down to the door, I went back into the apartment.

I looked at the gear, which was a brand new Belles 450, a minty and modded out PS Audio 5.0 preamp, a minty TD125MKII with Linn arm and LOMC, and...NHT speakers at the time. (I kept swapping speakers out)

I looked at the gear..and I looked at the milk cartons of records and all the records in the case and stacked against the walls.

I hesitated for about 2-3 seconds, trying to figure out how to get this done, to get down the back three story fire escape metal ladder that was half a room away.

I went for the records.

So many...I knew that I was likely going to have to throw them off the top of the stairs and hope they survived.

Screw the gear, I can always get more of that.

Thankfully none of that ever happened, they managed to keep the house from going up and limited the damage to the next door house going to ashes. I had most of the records down the stairs and was ready to toss the rest down, if I had to, before this was all resolved as not being a problem.

But I did get a real world "Audiophile OR music fanatic?" test. Which few people actually get. The full on "Real world, gun on the forehead, trigger pulled if you lie to yourself" kinda test.

As... people lie to themselves all day long. Real tests are rare and far between.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

With the advent of digital audio, this previously very real equation --- has been turned on it's head.

Music is now replaceable. Disposable. I'm not sure this is a good thing.

The ephemeral should remain ephemeral, and the materialistic components and aspects.... should not be in our hearts. Digital audio has screwed us over in places it should not ever be intruding in, when it comes to being human and real, over these past ~100,000 years.

When content is everywhere, the enabler, the doorway..becomes king.

Which is why you see millennials clutching and fondling their cellphones..as one report recently said..touching their 'smartphones' up to 1200 times per day. In this sort of context, it can be clearly seen it is not a smart phone, it is a retardation phone. Which science has found to be true. People who abuse their phones are growing less intelligent, with smaller circles of logic and skills. Get rid of the phone, become human and grow. We are short circuiting our biological functions in this smart phone abuse of ourselves...

_________________
(Ken Hotte, of) Teo Audio