In Reply to: RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. posted by Tony Lauck on December 4, 2012 at 05:56:37:
What adversarial position? I'm just trying to move the discussion beyond the "obvious" poor quality of MP3 as many insist and repeat over and over again here and throughout the audio press! If MP3's are as poor as some insist, it would be dead simple to differentiate. I'm even soliciting ideas of an example from those who hold this position.The "tricks" I speak of are just ways to encode the music without extreme reduction of certain frequencies visible on standard wave editors which LAME supports. In fact, doing this SHOULD degrade the quality of music than straight encoding since more of the bit bucket will be pushed into these frequencies and away from the ear's sweet spot. I've done tests like these for myself so I'm not doing anything here I did not subject myself to when trying to understand the lossy encoding process.
I really hope the most vocal critics would try the test because you guys could be right, which means I need to upgrade my equipment with good reason or have my ears checked. However, it the opposite could also be correct and hopefully we don't get snide remarks like the "10 second" comment or "my equipment gets turned off" when Cut Throat talked about MOG.
How about this Tony - what if I set up a poll on a blog where people can vote ANONYMOUSLY? Would you participate then? We'll just look at the results afterward and discuss.
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Archimago 12/4/1208:00:53 12/4/12 (12)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 09:02:44 12/4/12 (11)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Archimago 10:24:46 12/7/12 (5)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 10:38:33 12/7/12 (4)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Archimago 15:13:01 12/7/12 (1)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 16:26:57 12/7/12 (0)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Old Listener 11:54:24 12/7/12 (1)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 12:02:50 12/7/12 (0)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Ryelands 10:28:32 12/4/12 (4)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Archimago 10:16:22 12/7/12 (0)
- RE: Adversarial, really? RE: The procedure... RE: You would have to buy a CD(s), if I understand you correctly. - Tony Lauck 11:46:11 12/4/12 (2)
- With CDeX, it's as simple as copying the DLL into a particular folder. - carcass93 12:49:42 12/4/12 (0)
- It's the charm that does it . . . - Ryelands 12:29:48 12/4/12 (0)