Sound quality: CD vs FLV/MP3

Electric said:
The point being that you can tell the difference even if you use a cheap pair of Dj cans.
Click to expand...

You really can tell the difference between 320kbps and FLAC on a cheap sound card and cheap set of cans?

As Dolby said, we will agree to disagree.
 
genetic said:
You really can tell the difference between 320kbps and FLAC on a cheap sound card and cheap set of cans?

As Dolby said, we will agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

This I agree is pushing it a bit.
I think the type of music also plays a large part here.
Some music is inherently compressed and somewhat lifeless dynamically speaking.
 
I'm not sure why some think I'm trolling. Perhaps it is because I downloaded low quality MP3s of tracks I have on CD. I did this because at the time, I did not have the CD with me, and the tablet I carry with me on the road has no CD player. So YouTube seemed like a natural place to go.
 
Humberto said:
I'm not sure why some think I'm trolling. Perhaps it is because I downloaded low quality MP3s of tracks I have on CD. I did this because at the time, I did not have the CD with me, and the tablet I carry with me on the road has no CD player. So YouTube seemed like a natural place to go.
Click to expand...

I believe the polite word for this explanation is 'disingenuous'.

Having read your OP, I'd call it a downright lie.

Troll you are.
 
riscbroker said:
I believe the polite word for this explanation is 'disingenuous'.

Having read your OP, I'd call it a downright lie.

Troll you are.
Click to expand...

It must then be a form of transcendental trolling: posting a perfectly serious message, which overly mistrusting posters seek to construe as a troll thread.

I'm curious: what part of my post is a lie?
 
Humberto said:
It must then be a form of transcendental trolling: posting a perfectly serious message, which overly mistrusting posters seek to construe as a troll thread.

I'm curious: what part of my post is a lie?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should re-visit your original post. Then compare what you wrote there to what you offered by way of explanation in your post #63.

But anyway, good attempt at extending the trollfest.
 
riscbroker said:
Perhaps you should re-visit your original post. Then compare what you wrote there to what you offered by way of explanation in your post #63.

But anyway, good attempt at extending the trollfest.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should answer the question (What part of my post was a lie?) instead of asking me to re-visit the original post. It's a simple question: what part of my post was a lie?

You've made four posts in this thread. Not one of them has made any meaningful contribution to the topic under discussion. All you've done so far is to vandalise my thread by repeatedly accusing me of trolling. In this instance, I'm afraid that it's you who is guilty of trolling.
 
Humberto said:
Perhaps you should answer the question (What part of my post was a lie?) instead of asking me to re-visit the original post. It's a simple question: what part of my post was a lie?

You've made four posts in this thread. Not one of them has made any meaningful contribution to the topic under discussion. All you've done so far is to vandalise my thread by repeatedly accusing me of trolling. In this instance, I'm afraid that it's you who is guilty of trolling.
Click to expand...

Your original post:

So as to not have to carry my (sometimes rare and highly prized) classical CDs in the car with me, I located some of my favourite tracks from these CDs on YouTube and converted them to MP3 files, which I put on a memory stick to play on my car's radio.

I can confirm that the sound quality of these MP3s is audibly poorer than that of the actual CDs.

Followed by this:

I'm not sure why some think I'm trolling. Perhaps it is because I downloaded low quality MP3s of tracks I have on CD. I did this because at the time, I did not have the CD with me, and the tablet I carry with me on the road has no CD player. So YouTube seemed like a natural place to go.
 
riscbroker said:
Your original post:

So as to not have to carry my (sometimes rare and highly prized) classical CDs in the car with me, I located some of my favourite tracks from these CDs on YouTube and converted them to MP3 files, which I put on a memory stick to play on my car's radio.

I can confirm that the sound quality of these MP3s is audibly poorer than that of the actual CDs.

Followed by this:

I'm not sure why some think I'm trolling. Perhaps it is because I downloaded low quality MP3s of tracks I have on CD. I did this because at the time, I did not have the CD with me, and the tablet I carry with me on the road has no CD player. So YouTube seemed like a natural place to go.
Click to expand...

There is no contradiction between these two posts.

Most of the classical music CDs that I own are no longer commercially available. I do not like to carry these CDs with me when I go to work.

A few weeks ago, on a Sunday afternoon, while visiting my mother, I thought of the possibility to play some of the tracks from some of these CDs on a memory stick on my car's radio. I did not have the CDs with me, and even if I did, my tablet does not have a CD player, so I proceeded to locate these tracks on YouTube and I downloaded their MP3 versions.
 
adielk said:
Troll
Click to expand...

I certainly have no sleepless nights from being called a troll; I've even confessed to trolling in the past.

I'm amused at all these posts - "you're a troll" - as though some terrible secret about me is being revealed.

But in this thread, I was not trolling.
 
Dolby said:
You mentioned HT - just clarifying ....

And yes - I did say I can point out every time, but that's because of the volume issue. I think it would be extremely difficult to tell at the same volume. I don't believe night or day - unless you were blessed with golden ears or something
Click to expand...

Well yeah, other than me I don't personally know anyone who uses anything other than their home theater or PC for music.

I think that in a way we are agreeing yet talking past each other somehow. Let me put it to you this way. If you have two identical songs, one high quality and the other low quality, and also two sets of speakers, one giving high quality sound and the other low quality sound, you'll find the low quality song will sound much the same on either set of speakers. The high quality version of the song will start to sound better and better as the quality of the speakers goes up.

And yes, I will say night and day. MP3s, even at 320kbps, have compression artifacts, clipping, and a generally "soulless" sound. This isn't noticeable on low quality speakers, but with some decent speakers you begin hearing parts of the music that you didn't even know were there.

The people who have heard my setup and disagree are by and large the same people that think the Logitech Z5500s are the best speakers known to man :D (this statement is in no way aimed at you)

Oh - allow me to add - the song plays a massive role as well. I can't tell the difference with modern electronic music. My benchmark for the comparison is the likes of Black Label Society, Led Zeppelin, Elton John, etc.
 
Last edited:
Oj0 said:
If you have two identical songs, one high quality and the other low quality, and also two sets of speakers, one giving high quality sound and the other low quality sound, you'll find the low quality song will sound much the same on either set of speakers. The high quality version of the song will start to sound better and better as the quality of the speakers goes up.
Click to expand...

Yea I know audio works ;)

Higher quality > more transparent > shows up errors easier

I still think you're blessed with the hearing - as I've been around and owned many better than average setups and never heard the night day difference. If I was in Cape Town and definitely take you up on a blind AB test

Even Google is against you :P

EDIT : Though you haven't really answered how you do the comparison and get passed the levels ?
 
Last edited:
Oj0 said:
You're welcome to double blind test me using my audio equipment, clipping and compression even at 320kpbs is aweful. In fact, with semi decent sound equipment anyone other than the tone-deaf will probably be able to tell. MP3 is crap. Ultra crap. They'll do if you're using a R120 pair of earphones something, for anything decent I wouldn't touch them. FLAC for me, thanks.
Click to expand...

Then I must be tone-deaf. Using my Asus Xonar DG and Sennheiser HD518 headphones in a quiet room, I'm completely unable to tell the difference between 320 kbps MP3's and FLAC. I conducted the test using Birdy's album, as I had that available in FLAC.

I'm able to tell the difference between say 128kbps or 192 kbps MP3's and 320kbps MP3's, but higher than that? I'm unable to tell, even with my half-decent audio equipment. Maybe it will be more obvious with even better equipment or a different song? Please suggest.
 
Last edited:
So, if I want to download high quality MP3s of YouTube videos, how do I do this? So far I've used snipmp3.com but it seems that the sound quality is not good.
 
Humberto said:
So, if I want to download high quality MP3s of YouTube videos, how do I do this? So far I've used snipmp3.com but it seems that the sound quality is not good.
Click to expand...

Download from an alternative source. Nobody gets mp3's from YouTube..
 
Humberto said:
So, if I want to download high quality MP3s of YouTube videos, how do I do this? So far I've used snipmp3.com but it seems that the sound quality is not good.
Click to expand...

You find the high quality MP3 or FLAC file online and download that instead of trying to rip it from a YouTube video.

Also (since I'm sure you're dying for someone to mention it), your signature is cute. Why am I not on the list?
 
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/237...ounds-that-are-lost-when-you-compress-to-mp3/

Right now, you’re probably listening to music on your computer. The source of that music — whether you’re listening to an mp3 file or streaming — is a compressed version of a file that was much more detailed, but way larger. It’s worth interrupting your music for a moment and asking: What sounds are you missing?

To get a sense, watch the video above, created by Ryan Maguire, a Ph.D. student in Composition and Computer Technologies at the University of Virginia Center for Computer Music, for a project called The Ghost In The Mp3. It’s a song made with only the sounds that were left out when compressing Suzanne Vega’s “Tom’s Diner” to mp3.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X