Guru3D.com Forums

Go Back   Guru3D.com Forums > Hardware > Soundcards, Speakers HiFI & File formats
Soundcards, Speakers HiFI & File formats A cracking SoundBlaster ? Got new Speakers ? Be heard in here !


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old
  (#26)
Nato.dbnz
Ancient Guru
 
Nato.dbnz's Avatar
 
Videocard: 5870 Crossfire
Processor: 2500k 4.5GHz
Mainboard: ASUS P8P67 Pro
Memory: 8Gb Dominator 1600
Soundcard: Xonar STX + HD598
PSU: Silverstone Strider 1000W
Default 04-11-2012, 23:15 | posts: 3,261 | Location: Auckland NZ

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1refly View Post
128kbs mp3 works just fine for me.
Do you do most of your listening through a telephone?
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#27)
pokerapar88
Maha Guru
 
pokerapar88's Avatar
 
Videocard: XFX 7970 DD @ 1050/1500
Processor: i5 2500K @4.5Ghz CM V8
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68-V PRO
Memory: 8GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium + HT 5.1
PSU: CoolerMaster GX 750w
Default 04-11-2012, 23:22 | posts: 1,644 | Location: Argentina // Buenos Aires

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nato.dbnz View Post
Do you do most of your listening through a telephone?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

128kb/s MP3's are like listening to 8-bit music from MAME games

I once heard a 96kb/s MP3 song while stroking my cat. He jumped off the window and suicided.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#28)
TirolokoRD
Maha Guru
 
TirolokoRD's Avatar
 
Videocard: PNY 770 Superclocked
Processor: SB 2500K @ 4.3GHZ
Mainboard: Asrock Extreme3 Gen3 z68
Memory: 16GB Assorted @1600MHZ
Soundcard: Sound Blaster Zx
PSU: Antec 850W
Default 04-12-2012, 03:37 | posts: 1,867 | Location: Dominican Republic

Lol!!!......good one that!
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#29)
automaticman
Master Guru
 
automaticman's Avatar
 
Videocard: R9 290 Vapor-X
Processor: i5 2500k @ 4.4Ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Gen3
Memory: 16GB Mushkin DDR3 1600
Soundcard: SB ZxR/Onkyo/Polk
PSU: Seasonic X-1050
Default 04-12-2012, 04:32 | posts: 798 | Location: Orange County, CA

I'm going to be the odd man out here, almost all of my collection is ripped using WMA Lossless. I just let WMP or the Zune app rip and tag the songs. I have a thumb drive with lossy versions I use in my car.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#30)
TirolokoRD
Maha Guru
 
TirolokoRD's Avatar
 
Videocard: PNY 770 Superclocked
Processor: SB 2500K @ 4.3GHZ
Mainboard: Asrock Extreme3 Gen3 z68
Memory: 16GB Assorted @1600MHZ
Soundcard: Sound Blaster Zx
PSU: Antec 850W
Default 04-12-2012, 04:46 | posts: 1,867 | Location: Dominican Republic

Does somebody here knows an app that can update the name, the album and the art of a music file by the filename?
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#31)
p0ppa
Master Guru
 
p0ppa's Avatar
 
Videocard: GTX 580 SLI @ stock
Processor: i7 860 on U12P-SE2
Mainboard: Asus Maximus III Formula
Memory: 4x4GB Vengeance
Soundcard: X-FI Titanium Fatal1tyPro
PSU: Antec Truepower 750W
Default 04-12-2012, 05:06 | posts: 294 | Location: Australia

i mainly use 320 kbps CBR. if not, FLAC or APE.

Mediamonkey is a pretty neat program for ripping off my old CDs and organising tags and such
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#32)
TruMutton_200Hz
Ancient Guru
 
TruMutton_200Hz's Avatar
 
Videocard: N/A
Processor: i3 3110M
Mainboard: MD 99070 Medion Akoya
Memory: DDR-3 4gig
Soundcard: MiniMax DAC Plus, UMC-200
PSU: Li-ion
Default 04-12-2012, 15:17 | posts: 2,767 | Location: Belgium

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerapar88 View Post
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

128kb/s MP3's are like listening to 8-bit music from MAME games

I once heard a 96kb/s MP3 song while stroking my cat. He jumped off the window and suicided.
If I was forced to listen to nothing but mp3 all day long it wouldn't be a cat but it would be me that would suicide.

I cannot even stand the sound of a "normal" audio CD, not even if it's being played through a $50K stereo system. From my point of.. err.. "view", an audiophile quality vinyl record that's been transferred to a 24/96 lossless format is typically sounding so much better than CD that it makes 128 kb/s mp3 rips and their "untouched" CD versions both sound like poo in a blender. All that's needed to demonstrate how much CDs suck is a half decent $2.5K - $3K-ish turntable setup and a stack of used vinyl.

Semi-off topic: the improvements in sound quality from moving to a decent outboard DAC such as the one that I have is miles bigger than the difference between modern day onboard sound and any internal soundcard on the market.

It's like comparing a shabby 25 year old TV to a brand new 1080p Full HD $1K LED TV.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#33)
ROBSCIX
Don Sonic
 
ROBSCIX's Avatar
 
Videocard: 22" LCD on GTX260 C216
Processor: Intel I7 860
Mainboard: MSI P55 GD80
Memory: G.SKILL DDR3-1600 4X2GB
Soundcard: It Varies...
PSU: Sigma
Default 04-12-2012, 15:47 | posts: 16,158 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

Stick to the topic. Putting other people down for what they are using or getting into the my gear is better then your gear posts are NOT the topic.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#34)
pokerapar88
Maha Guru
 
pokerapar88's Avatar
 
Videocard: XFX 7970 DD @ 1050/1500
Processor: i5 2500K @4.5Ghz CM V8
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68-V PRO
Memory: 8GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium + HT 5.1
PSU: CoolerMaster GX 750w
Default 04-12-2012, 21:48 | posts: 1,644 | Location: Argentina // Buenos Aires

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruMutton_200Hz View Post
If I was forced to listen to nothing but mp3 all day long it wouldn't be a cat but it would be me that would suicide.

I cannot even stand the sound of a "normal" audio CD, not even if it's being played through a $50K stereo system. From my point of.. err.. "view", an audiophile quality vinyl record that's been transferred to a 24/96 lossless format is typically sounding so much better than CD that it makes 128 kb/s mp3 rips and their "untouched" CD versions both sound like poo in a blender. All that's needed to demonstrate how much CDs suck is a half decent $2.5K - $3K-ish turntable setup and a stack of used vinyl.

Semi-off topic: the improvements in sound quality from moving to a decent outboard DAC such as the one that I have is miles bigger than the difference between modern day onboard sound and any internal soundcard on the market.

It's like comparing a shabby 25 year old TV to a brand new 1080p Full HD $1K LED TV.
Interesting to know that an external DAC is better than an internal soundcard (for music)... but in the end it comes to tastes and needs, and ultimately, possibilites. I doubt a non-audiophile would be able to even comprehend the functionality of equipment like that and even less to have the good enough speaker system to take advantage from it. I need good surround and 3D sound effect that's why I'm getting an x-fi internal cards... and that's that.
I'd like for sure to have a 200k digital/analog system to listen with great orgasmic quality but I know it won't happen in a lifetime
I'll have to be happy with a couple of sennheisers and a creative sound card and 900+ kbs/s FLACS
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#35)
F1refly
Ancient Guru
 
F1refly's Avatar
 
Videocard: Intel Iris Pro
Processor: Core i7
Mainboard: Apple
Memory: 8 gigs
Soundcard: Apple
PSU: Apple
Default 04-12-2012, 22:55 | posts: 8,740 | Location: Indiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruMutton_200Hz View Post
If I was forced to listen to nothing but mp3 all day long it wouldn't be a cat but it would be me that would suicide.

I cannot even stand the sound of a "normal" audio CD, not even if it's being played through a $50K stereo system. From my point of.. err.. "view", an audiophile quality vinyl record that's been transferred to a 24/96 lossless format is typically sounding so much better than CD that it makes 128 kb/s mp3 rips and their "untouched" CD versions both sound like poo in a blender. All that's needed to demonstrate how much CDs suck is a half decent $2.5K - $3K-ish turntable setup and a stack of used vinyl.

Semi-off topic: the improvements in sound quality from moving to a decent outboard DAC such as the one that I have is miles bigger than the difference between modern day onboard sound and any internal soundcard on the market.

It's like comparing a shabby 25 year old TV to a brand new 1080p Full HD $1K LED TV.
its in your head. If it wasn't then everyone would be like that, but not everyone listens the same or hears the same and audio quality is very much subjective, what bothers some does'nt bother others.

128 mp3 doesn't bother me at all. i'm not an audiophile and i don't care if that flute behind 10 other instruments and 20 digitized effects is playing at 5000 khz eloping into a soft bamboo toned fadeout or not.
I also don't care if my toast is ubuntu brown or milky chocolate brown either but i guess some people like me are just not so obsessively picky.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#36)
BLEH!
Ancient Guru
 
BLEH!'s Avatar
 
Videocard: 2*7970 @ 1000/1500
Processor: "Core i9" @ 4.2 GHz
Mainboard: Gigabyte X79S-UP5
Memory: 16GB@1600MHz@9-9-9-24
Soundcard: Saffire Pro40/KRK Rokit 5
PSU: Enermax Revo 1500W
Default 04-12-2012, 23:58 | posts: 4,700 | Location: Not Far North Enough (England)

Presently mp3, bits at 320k, mostly 192. I record my own music at insane 192k/32 bit wav format then what that out at 320k mp3.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#37)
pokerapar88
Maha Guru
 
pokerapar88's Avatar
 
Videocard: XFX 7970 DD @ 1050/1500
Processor: i5 2500K @4.5Ghz CM V8
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68-V PRO
Memory: 8GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium + HT 5.1
PSU: CoolerMaster GX 750w
Default 04-13-2012, 00:30 | posts: 1,644 | Location: Argentina // Buenos Aires

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1refly View Post
its in your head. If it wasn't then everyone would be like that, but not everyone listens the same or hears the same and audio quality is very much subjective, what bothers some does'nt bother others.

128 mp3 doesn't bother me at all. i'm not an audiophile and i don't care if that flute behind 10 other instruments and 20 digitized effects is playing at 5000 khz eloping into a soft bamboo toned fadeout or not.
I also don't care if my toast is ubuntu brown or milky chocolate brown either but i guess some people like me are just not so obsessively picky.
As you said, its very subjective and that's why your comment is as wrong as his. Anyway, besides from the "subjetivism" there is a fact: someone with better hearing, and this is not only the hearing capability but the finesse and the ability to distinct sounds, instruments and quality of the sound (this is, on one hand, hereditary, and on the other hand can also be trained), will certainly appreciate a better hi-fi equipment than, for example, an ipod full of 192kb/s mp3s and the standard headphones.

Truth to be told: I have used, untill now, mostly onboard sound on my PCs, BUT, outside the pc environment I enjoy listening to music with an old Technics amplifier with jacked pioneer headphones SE-405 from the 80s, that give me some crispy vintage sound I love:



+



and I love it and it was for free as it was my dads and he gave them to me
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#38)
FULMTL
Ancient Guru
 
FULMTL's Avatar
 
Videocard: GTX 660Ti + AOC 27"
Processor: DEAD for now
Mainboard: ASUS P8Z77-I
Memory: DEAD
Soundcard: ShureSRH940+ JDS Labs C5D
PSU: DEAD
Default 04-13-2012, 01:32 | posts: 6,710 | Location: Portland, Oregon

320kb/s MP3's and 160kb/s Vorbis on Spotify.
I've listened to only a few of my favorite albums as FLAC to see a difference, and I couldn't tell that big of a difference probably because of my closed headphones. I don't have any decent open headphones to test it out on, but I will later on.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#39)
N0sferatU
Maha Guru
 
N0sferatU's Avatar
 
Videocard: ATI Radeon HD 5570
Processor: Intel Core i5 (3.5Ghz)
Mainboard: MSI P55-GD65
Memory: 4GB G.Skill DDR3 2060
Soundcard: X-Meridian/ Denon AHD7000
PSU: Corsiar TX-7000
Default 04-13-2012, 01:44 | posts: 1,470 | Location: United States

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1refly View Post
its in your head. If it wasn't then everyone would be like that, but not everyone listens the same or hears the same and audio quality is very much subjective, what bothers some does'nt bother others.

128 mp3 doesn't bother me at all. i'm not an audiophile and i don't care if that flute behind 10 other instruments and 20 digitized effects is playing at 5000 khz eloping into a soft bamboo toned fadeout or not.
I also don't care if my toast is ubuntu brown or milky chocolate brown either but i guess some people like me are just not so obsessively picky.
with even halfway decent equipment 128kbit sound "washy". I'm not an analytical listener I just enjoy the music. With that said, 192kbit is needed at a minimum.

Anyways other than my home theater this is what I mostly use for my music pleasure...128kbit = no no with this rig.

Figured I'd share since the other guy shared his cool rig.

   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#40)
automaticman
Master Guru
 
automaticman's Avatar
 
Videocard: R9 290 Vapor-X
Processor: i5 2500k @ 4.4Ghz
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68 Deluxe Gen3
Memory: 16GB Mushkin DDR3 1600
Soundcard: SB ZxR/Onkyo/Polk
PSU: Seasonic X-1050
Default 04-13-2012, 05:58 | posts: 798 | Location: Orange County, CA

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruMutton_200Hz View Post
I cannot even stand the sound of a "normal" audio CD, not even if it's being played through a $50K stereo system.

I find that it usually works the opposite way. The nicer the stereo system being used, the better the recording quality needs to be. The same things that make a high end sound system sound great also bring out all the bad details in a poor recording and make it sound even worse.

If you're just listening with a pair of computer speakers or base sound system in a Honda the mp3 quality won't make nearly as much of a difference. It all comes down to what the weakest link in the audio is.

Right now in my car I'm using 192kps WMA in my mostly stock Mustang's stereo. If I were to get around to installing the system I pulled out of my last car before getting rid of it I'm not sure if 192 would really cut it. I'd probably get a portable hard drive to keep the tracks in the lossless format they're stored on my computer in.


The other thing that matters maybe more than anything else is the difference between listening and critically listening.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#41)
aless83
Master Guru
 
Videocard: Gigabyte r9 280x
Processor: Intel i5 750 3.6ghz 1.12v
Mainboard: ASUS P7P55D premium
Memory: 8gb DDR3 1600 HyperX
Soundcard: on board
PSU: Corsair HX 650
Default 04-13-2012, 08:32 | posts: 203 | Location: Madrid, Spain

Quote:
Originally Posted by N0sferatU View Post
with even halfway decent equipment 128kbit sound "washy". I'm not an analytical listener I just enjoy the music. With that said, 192kbit is needed at a minimum.

Anyways other than my home theater this is what I mostly use for my music pleasure...128kbit = no no with this rig.

Figured I'd share since the other guy shared his cool rig.

Nice! My brother has some HD 650 Headphones and they sound awesome...
I've recently bought a Cyrus One Amp in mint condition, but it doesn't have a headphone output... how is the one you're using? any comments?


on topic: I have everything original on cd... took a long time (and money), and have everything ripped in mp3 320kbps on my pc.

thanks!

Last edited by aless83; 04-13-2012 at 08:38.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#42)
N0sferatU
Maha Guru
 
N0sferatU's Avatar
 
Videocard: ATI Radeon HD 5570
Processor: Intel Core i5 (3.5Ghz)
Mainboard: MSI P55-GD65
Memory: 4GB G.Skill DDR3 2060
Soundcard: X-Meridian/ Denon AHD7000
PSU: Corsiar TX-7000
Default 04-13-2012, 16:18 | posts: 1,470 | Location: United States

Quote:
Originally Posted by aless83 View Post
Nice! My brother has some HD 650 Headphones and they sound awesome...
I've recently bought a Cyrus One Amp in mint condition, but it doesn't have a headphone output... how is the one you're using? any comments?
I'm running HD600s (I prefer them over the 650s). AMP/DAC is an Audio-GD FUN. Works great. Powers them easily. Head-fi.org is helpful for any detailed questions about headphone stuff (or you can just PM me if ya want).
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#43)
ROBSCIX
Don Sonic
 
ROBSCIX's Avatar
 
Videocard: 22" LCD on GTX260 C216
Processor: Intel I7 860
Mainboard: MSI P55 GD80
Memory: G.SKILL DDR3-1600 4X2GB
Soundcard: It Varies...
PSU: Sigma
Default 04-13-2012, 16:27 | posts: 16,158 | Location: Guru3D Audio Lab

Quote:
Originally Posted by automaticman View Post
I find that it usually works the opposite way. The nicer the stereo system being used, the better the recording quality needs to be. The same things that make a high end sound system sound great also bring out all the bad details in a poor recording and make it sound even worse.

If you're just listening with a pair of computer speakers or base sound system in a Honda the mp3 quality won't make nearly as much of a difference. It all comes down to what the weakest link in the audio is.

Right now in my car I'm using 192kps WMA in my mostly stock Mustang's stereo. If I were to get around to installing the system I pulled out of my last car before getting rid of it I'm not sure if 192 would really cut it. I'd probably get a portable hard drive to keep the tracks in the lossless format they're stored on my computer in.


The other thing that matters maybe more than anything else is the difference between listening and critically listening.
To me, if I wanted to have the best sound on my system I figured why would I start with damaged Mp3 or other lossy encoding?
Might aswell get lossless copies of the tracks I like then work my way outward.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#44)
TruMutton_200Hz
Ancient Guru
 
TruMutton_200Hz's Avatar
 
Videocard: N/A
Processor: i3 3110M
Mainboard: MD 99070 Medion Akoya
Memory: DDR-3 4gig
Soundcard: MiniMax DAC Plus, UMC-200
PSU: Li-ion
Default 04-13-2012, 23:12 | posts: 2,767 | Location: Belgium

I know for a fact the DAC that I have is only small peanuts compared to a dCS Scarlatti DAC. I don't consider myself a real audiophile. Just someone who loves good music. The music matters alot more than sound quality. Music is an artform, whereas file formats and gear can only compare to it the same way a camera compares to a painting.

But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy listening to good music more if the sound quality of the music is good too. For that to happen, choosing the right encoding format is equally important as gear choice.

@ automaticman: The harder I try to listen critically, the less I can hear the differences that I'm trying to hear. Only by listening purely for pleasure instead, the flaws are magnified and, no, listening through bad gear doesn't make these flaws disappear.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#45)
pokerapar88
Maha Guru
 
pokerapar88's Avatar
 
Videocard: XFX 7970 DD @ 1050/1500
Processor: i5 2500K @4.5Ghz CM V8
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68-V PRO
Memory: 8GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium + HT 5.1
PSU: CoolerMaster GX 750w
Default 04-13-2012, 23:48 | posts: 1,644 | Location: Argentina // Buenos Aires

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruMutton_200Hz View Post
I know for a fact the DAC that I have is only small peanuts compared to a dCS Scarlatti DAC. I don't consider myself a real audiophile. Just someone who loves good music. The music matters alot more than sound quality. Music is an artform, whereas file formats and gear can only compare to it the same way a camera compares to a painting.

But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy listening to good music more if the sound quality of the music is good too. For that to happen, choosing the right encoding format is equally important as gear choice.

@ automaticman: The harder I try to listen critically, the less I can hear the differences that I'm trying to hear. Only by listening purely for pleasure instead, the flaws are magnified and, no, listening through bad gear doesn't make these flaws disappear.

I believe, after seeing the Scarlatti DAC specs and looks and reviews, that all the men that tried it had ears before putting their headphones on and had puss1es instead, when they took 'em off.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#46)
F1refly
Ancient Guru
 
F1refly's Avatar
 
Videocard: Intel Iris Pro
Processor: Core i7
Mainboard: Apple
Memory: 8 gigs
Soundcard: Apple
PSU: Apple
Default 04-14-2012, 00:16 | posts: 8,740 | Location: Indiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerapar88 View Post
As you said, its very subjective and that's why your comment is as wrong as his. Anyway, besides from the "subjetivism" there is a fact: someone with better hearing, and this is not only the hearing capability but the finesse and the ability to distinct sounds, instruments and quality of the sound (this is, on one hand, hereditary, and on the other hand can also be trained), will certainly appreciate a better hi-fi equipment than, for example, an ipod full of 192kb/s mp3s and the standard headphones.
appreciating better hi fi doesn't mean lower quality will bother that person. The fact that it bothers someone is similar to what you find annoying, meaning that something you find annoying is not a guarantee that it would annoy everyone..thats why its in your head. Lower quality music in fact does not bother everyone, if it did, it wouldnt exist and it also means that 128kbs would bother me as much as it does you. since it doesn't then obviously its a fact that it very much varies person to person, regardless of your hearing abilities.
and that is why my comment is not wrong.

Last edited by F1refly; 04-14-2012 at 00:19.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#47)
TruMutton_200Hz
Ancient Guru
 
TruMutton_200Hz's Avatar
 
Videocard: N/A
Processor: i3 3110M
Mainboard: MD 99070 Medion Akoya
Memory: DDR-3 4gig
Soundcard: MiniMax DAC Plus, UMC-200
PSU: Li-ion
Default 04-14-2012, 00:44 | posts: 2,767 | Location: Belgium

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerapar88 View Post
I believe, after seeing the Scarlatti DAC specs and looks and reviews, that all the men that tried it had ears before putting their headphones on and had puss1es instead, when they took 'em off.
Even the best headphones are crap next to a decent pair of big floorstanding speakers. And I don't just believe it but I know it for a fact.

EDIT:
 Click to show spoiler


Last edited by TruMutton_200Hz; 04-14-2012 at 01:21.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#48)
Darren Hodgson
Ancient Guru
 
Darren Hodgson's Avatar
 
Videocard: EVGA NVIDIA GTX 780
Processor: Intel Core i7-4770K
Mainboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe
Memory: 16GB Corsair Veng 1600MHz
Soundcard: SB X-Fi Titanium HD
PSU: XFX Pro B.E. 850W
Default 04-14-2012, 08:36 | posts: 11,693 | Location: England

Mine are MP3s encoded at 256-320 Kbps along with tagged album art of at least 600x600 or higher. It took me two weeks to download and attach the art a few years back but now I just add the art at the same time I rip the CDs and then I do two backups, one to an internal 500 GB hard drive and another to an external 1 TB hard drive.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#49)
pokerapar88
Maha Guru
 
pokerapar88's Avatar
 
Videocard: XFX 7970 DD @ 1050/1500
Processor: i5 2500K @4.5Ghz CM V8
Mainboard: Asus P8Z68-V PRO
Memory: 8GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium + HT 5.1
PSU: CoolerMaster GX 750w
Default 04-14-2012, 13:06 | posts: 1,644 | Location: Argentina // Buenos Aires

Quote:
Originally Posted by F1refly View Post
appreciating better hi fi doesn't mean lower quality will bother that person. The fact that it bothers someone is similar to what you find annoying, meaning that something you find annoying is not a guarantee that it would annoy everyone..thats why its in your head. Lower quality music in fact does not bother everyone, if it did, it wouldnt exist and it also means that 128kbs would bother me as much as it does you. since it doesn't then obviously its a fact that it very much varies person to person, regardless of your hearing abilities.
and that is why my comment is not wrong.
Well, a guy who ate food in mcdonalds since he was born and nothing else won't really know he/she is eating garbage.
Let him eat in a fine restaurant a couple of times and he won't go to mcdonalds no more.
Its not an "illusion" in your head, its about having tried something else.
Of course there will be people that don't care **** and like to hear 128kb/s mp3 as they don't care **** and pass through a crossing with the red light on
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#50)
thatguy91
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: HIS R9-280x Iceq X2 Turbo
Processor: i5-3570K
Mainboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme6
Memory: DDR3-2400 2x8GB
Soundcard: ALC898 + Microlab FC-730
PSU: Enermax Platimax 750W
Default 04-14-2012, 13:59 | posts: 3,862 | Location: Australia

Like I said earlier, don't see the point of using anything but VBR for MP3 these days (algorithm quality is set by -q, with -q 0 being the highest), and bitrate quality set by -V. -V3 or -V2 (higher bitrate) will provide sound much better than most MP3's you've heard, particularly when using the latest LAME (even the latest alpha's are fine if you test them first) and not one from 5 years ago.

192 CBR is still too low for some parts of music, and other parts too high and wasteful. 320 is definitely wasteful 99 percent of the time! I've actually heard properly encoded MP3 files (like I said above, almost all aren't encoded properly) using VBR settings even at -V 4 that sound better than 256 CBR, and in a couple of cases 320, simply because the algorithms etc in whatever they encoded it with sucked, or were based on older psycho-acoustic modelling.
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright (c) 1995-2014, All Rights Reserved. The Guru of 3D, the Hardware Guru, and 3D Guru are trademarks owned by Hilbert Hagedoorn.