Article on the trend towards computer storage/playback

Options
dragon1952
dragon1952 Posts: 4,894
edited May 2013 in Going Digital
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237727/How_big_is_the_sound_of_music_

There are actually people that call themselves audiophiles that admit that they feel there is no discernible difference between MP3 and, not only lossless, but hi-res?
2 channel - Willsenton R8 tube integrated, Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE DAC, audio optimized NUC7i5, Windows 10 Pro/JRiver MC29/Fidelizer Plus 8.7 w/LPS and external SSD drive, PS Audio PerfectWave P3 regenerator, KEF R3 speakers, Rythmik F12SE subwoofer, Inakustik Reference USB cable, Gabriel Gold IC's, Morrow Audio SP5 speaker cables. Computer - Windows 10/JRiver, Schiit Magni 3+/Modi 3+, Fostex PMO.4n monitors, Sennheiser HD600 headphones
Post edited by dragon1952 on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • txcoastal1
    txcoastal1 Posts: 13,132
    edited April 2013
    Options
    Well it still goes to
    #1 How well the master recording was done
    #2 How revealing is your system
    #3 Does your system have synergy
    #4 Which can actually be #1 do you give a crap and/or do you know what you are listening for

    Thanks for posting
    2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
    Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
    Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
    Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC

    erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BlueFox
    BlueFox Posts: 15,251
    edited April 2013
    Options
    dragon1952 wrote: »
    http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237727/How_big_is_the_sound_of_music_

    There are actually people that call themselves audiophiles that admit that they feel there is no discernible difference between MP3 and, not only lossless, but hi-res?

    Good article on how on lossless files and HD files. I'm not sure what you are referring to since I did not see that in the article.
    Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
    Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
    Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes

    Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
    Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
    Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables

    Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
    Three 20 amp circuits.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dragon1952
    dragon1952 Posts: 4,894
    edited April 2013
    Options
    BlueFox wrote: »
    Good article on how on lossless files and HD files. I'm not sure what you are referring to since I did not see that in the article.
    OK...I guess they didn't specifically mention hi-res but ......
    "I think the advantage is the flexibility," said Dan Gravell, who writes the Music Library Management Blog. "By getting the lossless files, you're investing in maintaining your music collection in the future."

    "It's definitely been a trend gathering steam in the past few years," he continued. "In terms of the advantages of lossless, the main thing cited is the quality of the sound, and that may or may not be correct."
    Gravell and others argue that the human ear is not sensitive enough to discern the differences between an MP3 file and a lossless audio file format. In fact, some blind tests have shown listeners can't tell the difference, Gravell said.
    Music aficionado Michael Gogesch keeps all 938 of his albums in FLAC files; he's got a 4TB networked storage system that allows him to access his music over the Internet.
    Flexibility for the future

    Gogesch, who frequents the readers forum of audio magazine Audioholics, agrees with Gravell that there's really no discernible difference in audio quality between an MP3 file, a WAV file and a FLAC file. For him it's all about flexibility."
    2 channel - Willsenton R8 tube integrated, Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE DAC, audio optimized NUC7i5, Windows 10 Pro/JRiver MC29/Fidelizer Plus 8.7 w/LPS and external SSD drive, PS Audio PerfectWave P3 regenerator, KEF R3 speakers, Rythmik F12SE subwoofer, Inakustik Reference USB cable, Gabriel Gold IC's, Morrow Audio SP5 speaker cables. Computer - Windows 10/JRiver, Schiit Magni 3+/Modi 3+, Fostex PMO.4n monitors, Sennheiser HD600 headphones
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • zane77
    zane77 Posts: 1,696
    edited April 2013
    Options
    What are the listening on a 49 dollar RCA system
    Home Theater
    Onkyo PR-SC5508 Sharp LC-70LE847U
    Emotiva XPA-5 Emotiva XPA-2 Emotiva UPA-2
    Front RTi-A9 Wide RTi-A7 Center CSi-A6 Surround FXi-A6 Rear RTi-A3 Sub 2x PSW505
    Sony BDP-S790 Dishnetwork Hopper/Joey Logitech Harmony One Apple TV
    Two Channel
    Oppo 105D BAT VK-500 w/BatPack SDA SRS 2.3 Dreadnought Squeezebox Touch Apple TV
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BlueFox
    BlueFox Posts: 15,251
    edited April 2013
    Options
    dragon1952 wrote: »
    OK...I guess they didn't specifically mention hi-res but ......
    "I think the advantage is the flexibility," said Dan Gravell, who writes the Music Library Management Blog. "By getting the lossless files, you're investing in maintaining your music collection in the future."

    Okay. I missed those lines since the article is overwhelmingly about how much better sounding lossless files are compared to lossy files. I guess they have those two guys for some type of balance. It does not matter what aspect of audio is being discussed since there is alway a "flat earth" fool who will say something does not matter, or make any audible difference.
    Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
    Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
    Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes

    Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
    Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
    Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables

    Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
    Three 20 amp circuits.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • falconcry72
    falconcry72 Posts: 3,580
    edited April 2013
    Options
    dragon1952 wrote: »
    ...There are actually people that call themselves audiophiles that admit that they feel there is no discernible difference between MP3 and, not only lossless, but hi-res?

    I have no doubt that there are people who admit that. Those people are wrong, but I have not doubt that those people exist.
    ...the human ear is not sensitive enough to discern the differences between an MP3 file and a lossless audio file format...

    Mine is. Maybe I'm not human? Or maybe the author of that statement is completely ignorant. That statement is so silly that takes all credibility away from anything else that person has ever said about digital media.
    ...there's really no discernible difference in audio quality between an MP3 file, a WAV file and a FLAC file.

    Idiots. Such an ignorant statement... again. I don't think these people understand what an MP3 file is.


    Let me play you a 16 kbps MP3 and see how it goes over. lol. it's all white noise because it has LOST so much of the original information. What about 32? 64? 128? .... oh I know! 320! That'll be just the RIGHT amount of degradation! People won't notice!


    I guess everyone's ears are different, so at what bitrate of MP3 do YOUR ears stop perceiving the degradation?

    There are (2) ways to deal with that question:

    1) Conduct double blind studies with yourself until you figure out whether it's at 128 or 256 or 320.... or 2822...

    OR

    2) Go Lossless and KNOW that there's no degradation!!!


    This is not complicated.
    2-Channel: PC > Schiit Eitr > Audio Research DAC-8 > Audio Research LS-26 > Pass Labs X-250.5 > Magnepan 3.7's

    Living Room: PC > Marantz AV-7703 > Emotiva XPA-5 > Sonus Faber Liuto Towers, Sonus Faber Liuto Center, Sonus Faber Liuto Bookshelves > Dual SVS PC12-Pluses

    Office: Phone/Tablet > AudioEngine B1 > McIntosh D100 > Bryston 4B-ST > Polk Audio LSiM-703's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Habanero Monk
    Habanero Monk Posts: 715
    edited April 2013
    Options
    As I have seen bandied about: Storage is cheap. All my music is full bit rate 1411 WAV/PCM. It is amazing how much storage you can purchase for not a lot of $$.

    I agree with article that certain formats serve certain purposes. Non-critical listening 320Kbps MP3 is probably fine.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • satguy08
    satguy08 Posts: 26
    edited April 2013
    Options
    I don't have an high end system at all, and I can tell the difference in resolution between mp3 and a wave file.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,906
    edited April 2013
    Options
    Habanero Monk wrote: »
    As I have seen bandied about: Storage is cheap. All my music is full bit rate 1411 WAV/PCM. It is amazing how much storage you can purchase for not a lot of $$.

    I agree with article that certain formats serve certain purposes. Non-critical listening 320Kbps MP3 is probably fine.


    That's the key here, since most these days don't sit down for any critical listening nor do they even know what to listen for.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bmor
    bmor Posts: 44
    edited April 2013
    Options
    Easily heard the difference with a friend the other night listening to "Kiko and the Lavender Moon" on the 128 kbps stream from Radio Paradise playing on the SB Touch. Halfway through the song I switched to the wav file on the hard drive attached to the Touch. We both liked the wav version better, it had more definition, better detail, just seemed to flow better (if that means anything).
    2 CH - SB Touch, CA 840C, CA 840Av2, PSB Imagine T
    HT - Pioneer 1325, Emo UPA-1, MA Silver RS series 7.1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Gatecrasher
    Gatecrasher Posts: 1,550
    edited April 2013
    Options
    tonyb wrote: »
    That's the key here, since most these days don't sit down for any critical listening nor do they even know what to listen for.

    There is a slight noticeable difference that can be discerned if you play the two side by side on a good system. Enough of a difference to warrant going lossless for an audiophile.

    However, if I were to sit you down in a chair in front of a good system and play a song by itself, you would have a very difficult time determining whether I was playing a 320kbps MP3 or a lossless audio file. At that point it would become more of a guess, especially if you had never heard the song played on that particular system before.

    Another thing that throws some variables in that can confound test results are the different releases of older music. As technology improves, the remastered releases usually get better and better sounding.

    I could take an older version of a classic rock CD and rip it to Wave and then take a brand-new remastered version and rip it to 320kbps MP3 and the MP3 would sound better. They are only as good as the original source so if you do take the "test" you have to make sure you are comparing apples to apples.

    There are variables in codecs and system specifics that can confound and bias comparisons of lossless formats vs each other so don't be 100% convinced that one lossless format is any better than another just from an unscientific test where everything hasn't been totally scrutinized to eliminate assignable causes for variation in the test procedure used.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • sucks2beme
    sucks2beme Posts: 5,558
    edited May 2013
    Options
    so much of modern music is so compressed and hot, I'm sure it sounds equally bad
    in any format.
    "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • falconcry72
    falconcry72 Posts: 3,580
    edited May 2013
    Options
    sucks2beme wrote: »
    so much of modern music is so compressed and hot, I'm sure it sounds equally bad
    in any format.

    The bad stuff sounds bad in any format, that's true... but the good stuff sounds good and needs to be preserved in a good (lossless) format. 90% of the modern artists that I'm interested in have exceedingly high production standards, and many of these new albums sound as good as anything I've heard from any time period. Not compressed, not hot. It's not **** you'd hear on FM radio... but who listens to the radio anyway? :biggrin:
    2-Channel: PC > Schiit Eitr > Audio Research DAC-8 > Audio Research LS-26 > Pass Labs X-250.5 > Magnepan 3.7's

    Living Room: PC > Marantz AV-7703 > Emotiva XPA-5 > Sonus Faber Liuto Towers, Sonus Faber Liuto Center, Sonus Faber Liuto Bookshelves > Dual SVS PC12-Pluses

    Office: Phone/Tablet > AudioEngine B1 > McIntosh D100 > Bryston 4B-ST > Polk Audio LSiM-703's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter