Last Active: Mar 30, 2022
Threads: 46
Posts: 910
Reputation:
16
Jan 07, 2014, 17:14 pm
(This post was last modified: Jan 07, 2014, 17:18 pm by connor17. Edited 1 time in total.)
First thing, a proper article:
http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
I've read some articles about this subject, and all of them are the same. Basically they say that in a double-blind testing, no one can tell any difference between "high definition" files and regular CD (16/44) ones.
"16 bits is enough to store all we can hear, and will be enough forever."
So, why all this nonsense?
In the record labels side, there is no question: they are going to sell the same thing again with a higher price.
So the question is: why people use it?
you answered that question yourself. while most people can't tell the difference, some can and that's why.
you won't hear the difference in all types of music but from experience, you can hear the difference in wind type instruments like saxophones, trumpets, tubas and certain guitar effects... at 16/44, it sounds distorted at at 24/96 it sounds less distorted.
Last Active: Mar 30, 2022
Threads: 46
Posts: 910
Reputation:
16
Jan 07, 2014, 18:34 pm
(This post was last modified: Jan 07, 2014, 19:28 pm by connor17. Edited 2 times in total.)
(Jan 07, 2014, 18:24 pm)stormium Wrote: you answered that question yourself. while most people can't tell the difference, some can and that's why.
you won't hear the difference in all types of music but from experience, you can hear the difference in wind type instruments like saxophones, trumpets, tubas and certain guitar effects... at 16/44, it sounds distorted at at 24/96 it sounds less distorted.
That's because the masters are different. I understand what you're saying, the point is that is imposible to prove anything over a subjective feeling. I'm afraid all the answers will be the same as yours, this is gonna be a very short thread.
Last Active: Apr 13, 2015
Threads: 62
Posts: 2,121
Reputation:
5
It is an objectively measurable fact that the one is superior to the other. Therefore it is not "fraud" to claim that something is "new and improved".
If people are foolish enough to choose to purchase something that is not subjectively superiour, that is their prerogative.
It's called freedom. Get over it.
[Incidentally, reminds me of a youtube clip I saw from shortly before the iPhone 5 came out. A news crew took an iPhone 4 around the streets of New York and told people it was the iPhone 5. Even many people who owned an iPhone 4 commented on how much lighter and more responsive the "new improved model" was. People are dumb, but that doesn't mean innovation should be outlawed.]
Last Active: Mar 30, 2022
Threads: 46
Posts: 910
Reputation:
16
Jan 07, 2014, 19:24 pm
(This post was last modified: Jan 07, 2014, 19:30 pm by connor17. Edited 1 time in total.)
(Jan 07, 2014, 19:02 pm)NIK Wrote: It is an objectively measurable fact that the one is superior to the other. Therefore it is not "fraud" to claim that something is "new and improved".
If people are foolish enough to choose to purchase something that is not subjectively superiour, that is their prerogative.
It's called freedom. Get over it.
[Incidentally, reminds me of a youtube clip I saw from shortly before the iPhone 5 came out. A news crew took an iPhone 4 around the streets of New York and told people it was the iPhone 5. Even many people who owned an iPhone 4 commented on how much lighter and more responsive the "new improved model" was. People are dumb, but that doesn't mean innovation should be outlawed.] I guess you're right. The problem in this torrent context is the massive waste of bandwidth but, again, is their prerogative to do it. Thanks for your elaborated answer. 
Last Active: Apr 13, 2015
Threads: 62
Posts: 2,121
Reputation:
5
For the record, I take your other point: while people are fools for spending money replacing items with other items when they actually can't tell the difference between them, companies (or rather the people who run the companies) are venal for marketing such meaninglessly "improved" products in a way which is deliberately misleading.
(Jan 07, 2014, 19:24 pm)connor17 Wrote: The problem in this torrent context is the massive waste of bandwidth but, again, is their prerogative to do it.
i wouldn't call it a waste of bandwidth. some people just want to share the best quality recording possible... especially when it comes to limited special releases/out of print and other rare recordings... and that's always going to be considered fucking rad in my opinion.
16 vs 24 is a lot like lossless vs lossy... most people can't tell the difference there either but that does not indicative of a difference not existing. besides, depending on the source, there could be added goodies like more than the typical two channel rip.
one of my favorite bands (nofx) regularly releases their material on vinyl and a lot of the hardcore fans will rip them into 24/96 or higher. if played with high quality equipment... that bump in quality adds several new dimensions to the music.... i don't own any of that equipment so i settle for 16/44.1 lossless since the percussion reproduction on most lossy formats drives me nuts... but i gladly still seed those 24/96 vinyl and dvd-audio rips just to keep them alive.
Last Active: Jun 24, 2016
Threads: 17
Posts: 406
Reputation:
33
Jan 08, 2014, 10:33 am
(This post was last modified: Jan 08, 2014, 10:34 am by gcjm. Edited 1 time in total.)
The quality difference is entirely subjective, as has been mentioned. However, seeing as 24/96 is 24/96 it can't be a fraud, unless it purports to be something other than 24/96.
It reminds me of Neil Young and his PONO obsession/tirade against mp3s.
Lossy is lossy ffs. Lossless is lossless. No-one can even tell the difference anyways (apparently). So the only person who really gave a shit was Neil.. let's see how well it sells.
Download what you want, upload what you want, it's free and it hurts no-one to ignore.
What a wonderful world, full of choice.
Last Active: Jan 08, 2014
Threads: 1
Posts: 2
Reputation:
0
I can only say I can hear a difference between 256kbps and lower and 320kbps, even poorly optimized VBR I can spot. True FLAC vs True Stereo 320kbps CBR, I cannot tell the difference.
Last Active: Jul 25, 2018
Threads: 52
Posts: 628
Reputation:
25
(Jan 08, 2014, 20:21 pm)sojuuk Wrote: True FLAC vs True Stereo 320kbps CBR, I cannot tell the difference.
almost all people can't tell the difference between 128kbps mp3 and 320kbps after hearing both samples played once.
after hearing both samples played side-by-side a few times, audiophiles and those with a keen sense of hearing will be able to determine which is which most of the time. it's dependent on what it is a sample of.
no-one can tell the difference between 320kbps mp3 and a lossless format with much accuracy at all, given today's "standard" of music distribution.
why is it that they can't tell the difference? each sample is different, as not all music or sound is treated with the same care in transfer, just as all high definition video is not equal in quality. some blu-rays sold in retail would still be described as shit quality by some people; in sound it depends on how close to the source the recording comes from and what care was taken to ensure that the most sound was preserved and thereafter heard.
there are many factors that make up the "quality" of sound, how and with what was it recorded? how was it edited after recording (what sort of terrible filters were applied)? how was it trans-coded, either by retailer or consumer? how was it played by/to the consumer? how well can the consumer hear?
it's impossible to say with a certainty one way or the other under what circumstances someone can differentiate quality in sound, literally every case is different. personally i've owned the highest grade headphones and performed the FLAC vs MP3 test on a PC with multiple softwares and multiple genres of music, and I could never tell the difference. with multiple channel audio and a high-grade set of speakers it might be a different story. but a very small percentage of individuals listen to music like that anymore, at least in the United States.
|
