Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 I dont disagree, there's some difference that CAN be noticed in expensive soundsystems.. how much does your soundsystem cost? but as you said yourself, 320 is practically identical... I believe that difference of wav and 192+ is barely noticeable in an average-to-expensive soundsystem.. As for lossless, from what i've heard FLAC format is also lossless but still smaller enough in size than wav... p.s off topic but who cares EDIT#: indeed i am satisfied with anything 192+ , as for dloads... usually crews rip releases at high quality...[some even cbr 256 or 320... lately it's usually vbr 192-320]... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Journey Man Project Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 since I don't have a credit card (which would most likely be required to download the mp3s) and can not get one unless I get a job and have a secured income for me right now there are just 2 options: buying it at market price or pirating. I choose to pirate. 406086[/snapback] saikosounds allow bank deposits at their prices, so no excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 I am a hi-fi nut. 406147[/snapback] What system do you have? I dont disagree, there's some difference that CAN be noticed in expensive soundsystems.. how much does your soundsystem cost? but as you said yourself, 320 is practically identical... I believe that difference of wav and 192+ is barely noticeable in an average-to-expensive soundsystem.. As for lossless, from what i've heard FLAC format is also lossless but still smaller enough in size than wav... p.s off topic but who cares EDIT#: indeed i am satisfied with anything 192+ , as for dloads... usually crews rip releases at high quality...[some even cbr 256 or 320... lately it's usually vbr 192-320]... 406148[/snapback] On a good system (£10K plus) the difference between a 320Kbps mp3 and an original CD are easily recognisable, particularly if the system is powered through a decent mains conditioner and hooked up with top quality mains cables, interconnects and speaker cables. On such a system mp3s will generally sound comparatively flat and compressed with flabby bass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 What system do you have? On a good system (£10K plus) the difference between a 320Kbps mp3 and an original CD are easily recognisable, particularly if the system is powered through a decent mains conditioner and hooked up with top quality mains cables, interconnects and speaker cables. On such a system mp3s will generally sound comparatively flat and compressed with flabby bass. 406157[/snapback] I am not sure about that since blind experiments that have been done in studios by sound engineers etc havent shown anything like this... now even pedro who seems to be passionate about audio quality and with a [probably] expensive soundsystem and is clearly anti-mp3 admits that " Sometimes it can be hard to notice any difference at 320k." now , i dont know charlie, maybe you should have done this test that i linked above... maybe search for a new one or something... do it in your own soundsystem..[how many thousands pounds did it cost you btw? ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Perhaps I did not make myself clear. Just as I can see the superiority of SACD over redbook (regular) CD, I can appreciate the difference between CD and MP3. There is a noticeable difference between 320k and CD if you have a proper audio system. However, in a cheap system (or to uneducated ears) it can SOMETIMES be difficult to see any difference at 320k. Furthermore, most people do not care enough about sound quality to bother. This is why I suggested that for most users in this forum, even 192k is probably alright. My system is embarassingly expensive. Unfortunately, I am the sort of audiophile who goes the full monty, including such things as expensive cables which some audiophiles claim to make little to no difference. Time for me to show-off: In my main system, the front end is either a Mark Levinson (CD) or a much cheaper Marantz (SACD). The pre-amp is a Conrad-Johnson and the power amp is either a Pass Labs (solid state) or a Unison Research (single ended 845 triode, for the classical music). The two speakers are Focal-JM Labs Utopia. The cables are Transparent Audio and Nordost and I have a power distribution unit (Nordost Thor). I also use special mains cables. The equipment rack is by Townsend Audio and I also have special Townsend supports for the speakers. I will skip on the price tag, which is terrifying. Hi-fi is a hobby of diminuishing returns. You could get 80% of my sound for a small fraction of the price. One just gets carried away... You do not have to have an ultra expensive system to see the difference. Nowadays with improving technology you can buy amazing components at very cheap prices. One word of hif-fi advice - don't waste your time with surround sound and suchlike if your primary interest is music. Go for two-channel sound and buy hi-fi seperates, not mini systems with flashing lights or lifestyle systems. Often the biggest compromise in those systems (even the most expensive ones) are the crappy speakers they come with. Pedro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 i see.. You do not have to have an ultra expensive system to see the difference. Nowadays with improving technology you can buy amazing components at very cheap prices. so approximately how much money would you need to spend in order to listen to a noticeable difference between a 320k mp3 and a wav ? [provided your sense of listening is relatively cultivated.] edit# will also do a few tests on my new-bought iAudio H10 mp3 player, which is said to have good sound... still the earphones are not the best ever, although sennheiser but i'll give it at try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinos Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 How about I send you two samples, of which one is extreme-quality LAME Mp3 and the second is a WAV? I can almost promise you won't hear the difference. Just don't run a spectrum analyzer. (supposing you can stay away from checking the file extensions... nah, it'd have to be a foolproof test) Just know that PROFESSIONALS can hardly hear the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 How about I send you two samples, of which one is extreme-quality LAME Mp3 and the second is a WAV? I can almost promise you won't hear the difference. Just don't run a spectrum analyzer. (supposing you can stay away from checking the file extensions... nah, it'd have to be a foolproof test) Just know that PROFESSIONALS can hardly hear the difference. 406230[/snapback] do it.. in fact you could convert the mp3 to wav again so that the extension is the same... [quality still remains mp3, the data that have been lost arent recovered, but it's just a wav file.. i think] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amphiton Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 You CAN hear the difference... if you have a good stereo system 320 kbps mp3 vs Wav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Time for me to show-off: In my main system, the front end is either a Mark Levinson (CD) or a much cheaper Marantz (SACD). The pre-amp is a Conrad-Johnson and the power amp is either a Pass Labs (solid state) or a Unison Research (single ended 845 triode, for the classical music). The two speakers are Focal-JM Labs Utopia. The cables are Transparent Audio and Nordost and I have a power distribution unit (Nordost Thor). I also use special mains cables. The equipment rack is by Townsend Audio and I also have special Townsend supports for the speakers. 406220[/snapback] Beautiful system you have. What's the Nordost Thor like, worth the substantial outlay? I don't suppose you're using it with the Valhalla mains cables as Nordost suggest? I currently have a Sugden Masterclass CD player upgraded with a Philips 16-bit double-crown DAC chip, Sugden Masterclass pre-amp, Sugden Masterclass Class A Stereo power amp (just 50 watts per channel but pure class A), ProAc Future One speakers, Isotek mains conditioner, Van Den Dul Mainsstream mains cables upgraded with silver-plated Wattgate IEC and 13A mains plugs, and Nordost Valkyrja XLR interconnects and speaker cables. Ridiculously expensive. Hi-fi's an addiction. I'm not proud of how much I've spent on my system but hi-fi manufacturers are all too aware audiophiles will pay silly money for the smallest improvements in sound quality. It's often daylight robbery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAH2D2 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 What system do you have? On a good system (£10K plus) the difference between a 320Kbps mp3 and an original CD are easily recognisable, particularly if the system is powered through a decent mains conditioner and hooked up with top quality mains cables, interconnects and speaker cables. On such a system mp3s will generally sound comparatively flat and compressed with flabby bass. 406157[/snapback] Perhaps I did not make myself clear. Just as I can see the superiority of SACD over redbook (regular) CD, I can appreciate the difference between CD and MP3. There is a noticeable difference between 320k and CD if you have a proper audio system. However, in a cheap system (or to uneducated ears) it can SOMETIMES be difficult to see any difference at 320k. Pedro 406220[/snapback] You CAN hear the difference... if you have a good stereo system 320 kbps mp3 vs Wav 406235[/snapback] http://www.djmag.com/djtech018.php Results > The experts, who between them have some of the best ears in the business, could not consistently tell the difference between the original and the lossy. Ohh yeah.. the test between losless and lossy was done in the equipment they have in Fabric, which probably the best stereo system of any club in London right now... don't quote me on it, but that's what i heard... My point is, there have this preconception that mp3 sucks because we heard a couple of bad rips back when napster was still a buzzword... things have changed apparently... since the experiment nick mentioned i have been dabbing with the new LAME ripper and now rip all my cd's to 320 with the 'insane' preset and to my ears there's just no point discussing the finer points between this mp3 and .wav... you should give it a go yourself... cause i came with the attitude, "it sounds like crap in my infinity speakers" and i was wrong... as for the discussion at hand i buy the plastic makes me feel good about it myself when i own the plastic, how materialistic but true... i live in a third world country but they have a thing called Express Parcel System (EPS) and my packages more often than not arrive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Interesting article, but it didn't say what track was used in the test. The difference in quality between an original CD track and the equivelant MP3 file will be more difficult to determine when dealing with electronic music. Play a live folk song or a classical number and it becomes easier to tell which is which. The original CD recording will have room to breathe, instruments and voices will sound fuller and more natural. Dynamics and resolution will also be better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Beautiful system you have. What's the Nordost Thor like, worth the substantial outlay? I don't suppose you're using it with the Valhalla mains cables as Nordost suggest? I currently have a Sugden Masterclass CD player upgraded with a Philips 16-bit double-crown DAC chip, Sugden Masterclass pre-amp, Sugden Masterclass Class A Stereo power amp (just 50 watts per channel but pure class A), Proac Future One speakers, Isotek mains conditioner, Van Den Dul Mainsstream mains cables upgraded with silver-plated wattgate IEC and 13A mains plugs, and Nordost Valkyrja XLR interconnects and speaker cables. Ridiculously expensive. Hi-fi's an addiction. I'm not proud of how much I've spent on my system but hi-fi manufacturers are all too aware audiophiles will pay silly money for the smallest improvements in sound quality. It's often daylight robbery. 406246[/snapback] I am using Nordost Valhalla interconnects, but not the mains cable (probably next upgrade). The Nordost Thor makes a difference and if you going to spend as much money as I have, then it is worth it. But be careful with some AC mains products. I tried a PS Audio P300 AC regenerator and was horrified at the way my system lost its dynamics. Your system looks excellent. Sudgen products are great and I love the Proac sound. I used to have a Proac 2.5. I have heard the Future One in Hi-fi shows and they sound wonderful. But the triangle shape is an acquired taste. The Isotek mains conditioner (it is the Titan that you have?) is very good, probably not necessary for you to change it for a Nordost Thor. The Nordost Valkyra are also fantastic (and bloody expensive) and it is not worth upgrading at this point to Valhalla. VDH make great products. I have a VDH CS 122 speaker cable in one of my secondary systems. You probably have 90% of my sound at a much lower price. Better value for money and for electronic music I am not sure that my system is that much better than yours. Pedro PS The Fabric sound system (which I know well since I have been there dozens of times) is fantastic. The best one that I know of in a London club. But it is not a hi-fi system. You also get all sorts of studies suggesting that people can not hear differences in formats, cables, mains conditioners and other stuff. Other studies show otherwise. I love music and I don't care if someone can not hear differences. In fact, they are better off than I am. They don't have to spend as much money to be satisfied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 PS The Fabric sound system (which I know well since I have been there dozens of times) is fantastic. The best one that I know of in a London club. But it is not a hi-fi system. You also get all sorts of studies suggesting that people can not hear differences in formats, cables, mains conditioners and other stuff. Other studies show otherwise. I love music and I don't care if someone can not hear differences. In fact, they are better off than I am. They don't have to spend as much money to be satisfied. fair enough.. but have you ever though that e.g the difference you might hear when replacing e.g an old cable with a brand new ulra-expensive one can be merely due to placebo effect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 fair enough.. but have you ever though that e.g the difference you might hear when replacing e.g an old cable with a brand new ulra-expensive one can be merely due to placebo effect? 406274[/snapback] Cables are as intrinsically important as the hi-fi components themselves. If you spend £10,000 a CD player and amplifier it's important the signal feeding the amplifier is as close as possible to the signal that left the CD player. Many cables employ special technology to ensure as little data as possible is lost or 'coloured' during this transfer. As for the placebo effect, I'm sure it plays a small part but as Pedro stated, we all hear things differently. Some people have very sensitive hearing and subsequently will notice subtle changes in ecoustics. I have a friend with very keen sight, he's constantly telling me my shelves and pictures are crooked but I don't see it, my eyesight isn't as tuned as his. Likewise, I hear nuances in music his ears don't detect. In summary - because one person cannot sense something it doesn't necessarily mean the next person is unable to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedro Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 fair enough.. but have you ever though that e.g the difference you might hear when replacing e.g an old cable with a brand new ulra-expensive one can be merely due to placebo effect? 406274[/snapback] Nick, the placebo effect does happen and it does so more often than many of us in the audiophile circles are aware of (or care to admit) it. That is why one must take care (and time) to make sure that some upgrades are worthwhile. And which is why I use blind testing for my cables as well as a extended trial at home. What might be audible in one system, isn't so in a different system. In my system, I chose not to use a special mains cable for my power amp (the Pass Labs X-350). Even though that amp cost me GBP 10,000, I decided I could not hear ANY difference with using special mains cables no matter how hard I tried. On the other hand, my front-end of my system benefited from special mains leads. But even here, the differences were very small and in one case I could not detect it through blind testing, only through extended use. On the other hand, all my speaker and interconnect cables made obvious improvements. Pedro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 In summary - because one person cannot sense something it doesn't necessarily mean the next person is unable to. 406282[/snapback] I never disagreed with this... But let's just wait for the next blind test.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepdrone Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 Ontopic: No encrypted discs, no special copyright formats can stop the sharing of music. The fact, that you can record what you are listening to, makes the copying protections useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.