Flacs vs Mp3's

[Sam Z Man]

I read through this thread and holy fuck it gives a really good laugh to someone who can't care less when it comes to audio.

[Whit3Rav3n]

 

I'm burnt out. Tell you what, when I have something, I'll PM you in the future. I'll look back to your post for reference.

 

I was talking about 2-5khz range specifically. But yes, outside of that range it does look like the HD800s have lower distortion. 0.2% is a pretty big difference outside of 2-5khz?

 

 

Well 0.2% more is about twice the distortion so I would say that should be noticeable. I don´t have an HD 600 but I have an HD 650 and I did find that it sounded more distorted in general than the HD 800.

[Arty]

You didn't specify bit rates.

shitty mp3 vs good flac???

[.spider.]

ya you're right. I should have got a studio microphone out, recorded the audio then analyzed the waveform to confirm what my ears could already tell  :rolleyes:

Are you sure?

 

You should listen to this

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Example_Shepard_Tones.ogg

 

And after listening look at this. 

http://i.imgur.com/otJRjnO.png

[creatip123]

 

No. They're not. Are you really going to turn this into a bullshit philosophical argument? The criteria of high-fidelity audio is very well-defined and not arbitrary or an abstract construct.

 

Wait, don't tell me you think better and worse is not subjective? True, high fidelity audio is defined, measureable and quantifiable. But it's just one of the many possible standards people use when they are judging if a thing is better or worse than the other things. 

 

As I understand it, high fidelity = how close the reproduction result compared to the original. One of the measurement is how low the distortions, right? Ok, you and maybe millions of other people judge a (audio) thing is good, bad, better or worse using this standard. But you can't seriously be thinking that 6 billion people on this planet must uniformly use the exact same standard to judge things?

 

People judge a thing as better or worse using their own standards that they believe in. For example, I know ODAC + O2 got a lot less distortion than the Aune T1 tube dac, because of the analog tube. By definition, yes, the O2 combo is more high fidelity than the T1, that I agree. Now, which one do I think is the better one? Of course I'm gonna go with the one I like, which is the T1. My standard for judging audio stuffs is not 'as high fidelity as possible'. As long as I like it, then it's better for me. I'm not buying something because it's 'got the least distortion, most neutral, closest as it can get to the original source, perfect reproduction, etc, etc'. I buy things because I like the resulting sounds, and that's that. What good is a thing that's 'the best out of the best' if I don't even like it?

 

 

 

This is thoroughly disingenuous. Are people really interested in spending money on audio gear that merely sounds "different"? I seriously doubt it. These products get sold because people believe they are beneficial in some way. That's how they're marketed, reviewed, and discussed online. If you're happy with cables that merely sound different, and recognize that they may even reduce fidelity, that's your prerogative. But arguing across the board that people are merely going for tiny "differences" in sound is dishonest. I think it's pretty clear that people invest in cables and everything else because they are trying to get better, more accurate sound.

But the implication is there; this discussion is not occurring in a vacuum ("Is it worth the extra money?"). Expensive gear is generally valued more on the understanding that it is more capable. But if the only thing people cared about was getting a sound that they liked - something "different" - then expensive gear wouldn't exist. It's not hard to fuck with an audio signal to get a certain timbre or tone and therefore shouldn't cost any more. If identifying such a difference takes a double blind ABX test that you can't even pass 100% of the time, then what exactly was accomplished? If not for quality, then at least enjoyment?

 

People spending (more) money on an audio stuff that sounds better to them subjectively. Which one is more suited to their preference, that one automatically become 'better' for them.That's why there are so many variations of headphones and speakers around, all with different frequency responses. If there is only one standard of judging, then all the headphones will sound similar (not the same, just similar). I mean, come on, HD650 is dark, Tesla T1 is bright. They can't both be 'accurate' when they sound so different. So which one is the closest one to the original? Let's say, for argument's sake, T1 is the closest. So T1 is definitely better than HD650? Everyone must agree that the T1 is the better one? Everyone must pick and buy the T1 (assuming money is not a problem) because it's definitely better than HD650?

 

Marketing thingamajigs with their half-fictious feature descriptions, measurements, and whatnot target the buyers who are 'lost'. Buyers who don't really know what to look for, less informed, less experienced, etc. 

 

I don't represent other people, I represent myself. What I think is just that, cables sound 'different'. Better if the difference is more suited to my taste, worse if it deviates more from my taste. And I also said the scale is tiny. If cable A is better (subjectively for me), and it's $10 more, then I'd consider it. If it's $100 or $1000 more, no way I'm spending that kind of extra money for that tiny scale of difference.

 

Now what other people think and believe when they invest their money on cables, that is beyond my control. I don't, and never did encourage people to go multi-hundreds or thousands extra for cables upgrade. What I said in past topics was that if it's just a few extra bucks, then why not. Custom cables usually look good and more durable anyway, so just think of paying extra for those things. 

 

I don't know for sure, but I don't think there are people who buy expensive audio stuffs for their 'high-fidelity' specs, features, and reviews, keep using it, but don't like it at all. 

[TumbleButt]

I only spend on cables if the cables that came with my headphones are 1.) too long 2.) too short 3.) gets fucked up 4.) don't work and the company doesn't cover that (for whatever reason why they do that) 5.) If I see sleeved cables that hopefully don't make the audio quality worse and is reasonably priced.