There is a difference, oddly enough I find k mp3 to be the lowest acceptable quality that is OK to listen to. Anything below it is too far gone I find k pretty decent stuff but k can sound very close to I would say there is a noticeable difference if you're playing it back in the right setting. Jay M.
I seem to remember a study that showed that some source material can compress better than other source material. Therefore you need to listen to every song at different rates and encode accordingly. Or do what I did - just encode everything lossless. If you wanna hear the actual difference, take a track at and import to Daw. Import the track at and then import a lossless file if you have one.
Flip the phase on the compressed files one at a time and you should hear what is lost. Thanks guys, you've helped a lot. After doing about fifty blind tests my conclusions were that really does sound fine All in all, I don't think it matters too much.
Now vinyl on the other hand kills digital. HiFi Yeah. I don't notice a difference really, for mp3s I just try to get it at the reverbnation file size limit. So of is to big I lower it. I'm beginning to like soundcloud more than both soundclick and reverbnation so I'm unsure what their file size limit is because most of my internet mp3 upload to the SCloud. Sent from my LG-P using Gearslutz. I recently ordered a pair of focal speakers. These are considered good speakers.
As a general rule, "hearing music at kbps and kbps will make a significant difference" seems overblown to me. Which is more of a kind of sound engineer hearing than listening for enjoyment. I think it's rather rare for some sound to fall conspicuously apart under compression like that accordion tremolo. I find a lot of the time that people are encoding and playing with settings they may not understand.
This question is so finite though that it almost parallels the "analogue vs digital audio" debate. Saying that, are there folks out there who have stereo systems that replicate the audio well enough that developing a preference for over is believable? Both are simple, but valid studies that indicate that we can't really tell any difference between files encoded above kbps.
I am a very picky listener. I notice that with acoustic instruments, you will hear the difference on a good audio set compared with mp3 players that are not high end audio. I like dance organs from Decap Antwerpen Belgium and they are equipped with jazzflute ,vibraton, and flute. They have 8 registers that are natural pipes and the rest is electronics.
It uses an inline synthesizer for sax, baritone, and trumpet. I have all these music cd's stored as. I tried. There is something missing in the warmth of the music. Leaving the math out and measuring software off the table, there is some kind of distortion or oscillation in the middle upper frequencies. You hear it more with sustained Strings or Keyboard tone,and especially with symbols. All MP3's seem to have this issue no matter the resolution.
It's less pronounced with a kbps but still there. There is also a smaller stereo image in an open speaker situation. With headphones, I can't hear the change.
How many people can, is another story. I was taught as an Engineer to remember only 5 percent of the population can hear what you hear, so don't spend all of your time making it perfect. Just worry about good. No debate. If someone can't hear the difference it is because their hearing has been damaged and they just can't hear the freq differences. When you lessen the bitrate, you lessen the quality!
I don't understand why this is even a question. LOOK at the data! Self explanitory. Beside that, there are a ton of results on google from MANY credible sources people! It's not rocket science I am new to this but thought it would be helpful to share my 2 cents worth. I noticed the depth of sound for a given music file when I stumbled upon an old version coded in kbps and listened to the same file back to back with a version coded in kbps.
The annoyance is that once I sensed this difference, the perfectionist in me is now consigned to updating the remainder of my almost exclusively music library. Used reference quality headphones to notice the difference. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Ask Question.
Asked 10 years, 6 months ago. Active 2 years, 2 months ago. Viewed 59k times. Are there any good quality tests that have been done in this area?
Improve this question. Community Bot 1 3 3 bronze badges. Can't say I'm the expert on this, but if you want to hear differences between different MP3 bitrates, the decay of a crash cymbal is worth listening to.
It can sound very 'slushy' at lower bitrates. Mark - Cheers for the info about the crash cymbal. I've read somewhere I think that the high pitched trumpet is also a giveaway for some people. But I could have just made that up, I honestly can't remember. I do all my CD or. I can't tell the difference between the. I'll definitely keep an ear out for the cymbal though.
Muntoo posted this link on the same question on skeptics, and I just had to share again: xkcd. JYelton - It's one of his best. If you pick a bit of music, convert it to both different formats, convert them back to lossless high quality files again, stick em side by side in a decent DAW, phase flip one of them and mix them together, the phase reversal effect may mean that you you can hear just the difference between the two files.
I've not tried it myself mind, so I don't know how — eviltobz. Show 2 more comments. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. Ian C. Cheers for this Ian. Use precise geolocation data. Select personalised content. Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance. Develop and improve products.
List of Partners vendors. Sam Costello. Sam Costello has been writing about tech since Best just to leave them as they are. My advice is, as ever, to use your ears and compare versions — listening carefully on very good headphones will give you some impression of what your transcoded MP3s will sound like when you roll up at a club. So what about bit then? Digital music is basically a load of 1s and 0s, and bit means every time a slice of the tune is sampled, it is represented with 24 1s and 0s, as against bit, which is… well, you guessed.
It only comes into play with uncompressed, lossless audio WAVE and AIFF , which when ripping or recording, you can choose to do so at 16 or bit resolution.
Most studios work in bit, and then when the music is released to the world, it is reduced to bit which is CD quality. Apple is saying it would be good to release bit to the world — which being on an Apple platform, would probably be bit AIFF files. CDs are bit, Who knows if it would catch on?
What format or formats do you prefer?
0コメント