If you had an account on forum.suprbay.org with at least one post, you do not need to re-register. Your account is still active and your Suprbay username and password will work.

24/96 FLACs are a fraud
#61
Yoss, you're right, everyone should do the comparison. It's complicated though: hardware, software, bias, etc.
There's an interesting concept, "the law of diminishing returns", that comes handy here, and that is the original idea of this thread, back in the day. This law doesn't "need" a valid argument (true), just a strong argument (the premises make the conclusion "very likely" true). If you need much more expensive hardware, very much bigger files, to "maybe" notice an improvement, it doesn't really matter in the end, it's a Pyrrhic victory.
I'm not a purist, I just want things done. If something is too much trouble, I just pass. You may think that I don't care, I think it's pragmatism.
Reply
#62
(Mar 29, 2014, 15:29 pm)connor17 Wrote: Yoss, you're right, everyone should do the comparison. It's complicated though: hardware, software, bias, etc.
There's an interesting concept, "the law of diminishing returns", that comes handy here, and that is the original idea of this thread, back in the day. This law doesn't "need" a valid argument (true), just a strong argument (the premises make the conclusion "very likely" true). If you need much more expensive hardware, very much bigger files, to "maybe" notice an improvement, it doesn't really matter in the end, it's a Pyrrhic victory.
I'm not a purist, I just want things done. If something is too much trouble, I just pass. You may think that I don't care, I think it's pragmatism.

Ok then, don't worry about better equipment yet try it anyway. If you don't hear it then you can always delete the files. Wink

I think you'll hear a remarkable difference between cd and DSD and even 24/96 and DSD but I guess we'll never know.
Reply
#63
Any site that claims WAV sounds better than FLAC is already full of shit before even considering the rest.
Reply
#64
(Mar 29, 2014, 15:22 pm)yossarian83 Wrote: How many comparisons have you done for yourself? Have you had someone randomly select files so you can't see then try to determine which was hi-res? Were you using equipment that supported it? What better ears than yours can't tell a difference? I've seen just as many people run audio comparison softs and get positive hits as no difference, which is why i question the validity of some of the studies.

I don't question the validity of my own ears and I certainly know how to conduct a listening test with the right gear... I do question the validity of a website's "test" that ultimately just wants to sell you something (Blue Coast Records).

(Mar 29, 2014, 15:55 pm)kjf Wrote: Any site that claims WAV sounds better than FLAC is already full of shit before even considering the rest.

Ha. I didn't even think about that one.
Reply
#65
(Mar 29, 2014, 15:59 pm)tuffgong Wrote:
(Mar 29, 2014, 15:22 pm)yossarian83 Wrote: How many comparisons have you done for yourself? Have you had someone randomly select files so you can't see then try to determine which was hi-res? Were you using equipment that supported it? What better ears than yours can't tell a difference? I've seen just as many people run audio comparison softs and get positive hits as no difference, which is why i question the validity of some of the studies.

I don't question the validity of my own ears and I certainly know how to conduct a listening test with the right gear... I do question the validity of a website's "test" that ultimately just wants to sell you something (Blue Coast Records).

(Mar 29, 2014, 15:55 pm)kjf Wrote: Any site that claims WAV sounds better than FLAC is already full of shit before even considering the rest.

Ha. I didn't even think about that one.

I see, so you think it's a fixed test therefore not worth your time. That's understandable and very easy to test. Just look at the frequency response, see if it fits the format. You can also flip the phase and look at the sum, see what's missing or added between, for example, the mp3 and the 44.1/16.

The good thing about this specific test is it's an ideal style recorded in an ideal environment that really shows off the differences but if you wish to remain an ostrich with your head in the dirt, clinging to what someone wrote on the internet rather than seeing for yourself, be my guest.

BTW, I've run blinded test with friends back when I was in the service and have personally been able to differentiate between different formats of the same file at the same bit rate and sampling freq, in this case it was ALAC and FLAC... both supposedly lossless but pretty easy to tell the difference on my monitors. If I remember correctly I don't think I was wrong a single time.
Reply
#66
(Mar 29, 2014, 16:26 pm)yossarian83 Wrote: The good thing about this specific test is it's an ideal style recorded in an ideal environment that really shows off the differences but if you wish to remain an ostrich with your head in the dirt, clinging to what someone wrote on the internet rather than seeing for yourself, be my guest.


There is nothing to test. There is nothing whatsoever documenting source.

I can create a bunch of files and label them whatever I want and call it a "test"

The fact that you are basically calling Nyquist a liar is all I need to know about your "test"
Reply
#67
(Mar 29, 2014, 16:31 pm)kjf Wrote:
(Mar 29, 2014, 16:26 pm)yossarian83 Wrote: The good thing about this specific test is it's an ideal style recorded in an ideal environment that really shows off the differences but if you wish to remain an ostrich with your head in the dirt, clinging to what someone wrote on the internet rather than seeing for yourself, be my guest.


There is nothing to test. There is nothing whatsoever documenting source.

I can create a bunch of files and label them whatever I want and call it a "test"

The fact that you are basically calling Nyquist a liar is all I need to know about your "test"

Not calling him a liar, what I'm saying is that your body responds to frequencies greater than 20k, not your ears mind you but, for example, your eyes have been shown to respond to as high as 60k. Every sensory experience is highly integrated, while we certainly have dedicated sense organs, they constantly communicate with our other senses in order to give us a better representation of what we're experiencing.
Reply
#68
Did you seriously just say my eyes respond to pressure waves? How's that work when I'm wearing headphones?
Reply
#69
Indeed, more than just your eyes and ears respond to pressure waves though not as efficiently and reliably as your ears do. In fact, most of your nerves are probably altered though very slightly by such stimuli. In response to your question, probably not very well but better if you have open-backed cans.

Here's the NPR story that talks about the comparison files... http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2013/...sound-like
Reply
#70
a question

if a sound engineer's equipment, the 192khz type, equipment becomes faulty.. and only records upto 48khz.. how will he know???
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Fellow keeps posting FLACs, but never seeds WasAtWoodstock 1 572 Nov 25, 2021, 12:28 pm
Last Post: Vox



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)