Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums
   
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )Resend Validation Email

DJ Panel ( Server Stats )   Song History   Initial D World Chat Room (IRC)   Broadband Stream
RADIO BROADCAST » streaming at 96kbps with 11 unique listeners, playing (Fifth Stage DS2) Chris Stanton - A Perfect Hero

       

  Important Rules
• Please do NOT post knowingly false information. Violators will be issued an actual warning.
• Please do NOT copy and paste articles from other websites. Link and short description is ok, but please do not copy and paste pages of info. Violator will be issued a verbal warning.
• Do NOT post any torrents and/or links to pirated copies of software here. Violator will be issued a verbal warning.
• Discussions about illegal materials such as ROMs, WAREZ and methods of copying copyrighted materials are not encouraged in this subforum.

» FORUM MODERATOR : FORUM MODERATOR

 

Views: 1,300  ·  Replies: 15 
> Can you hear the difference?
Yosako
  Posted: Aug 25 2016, 05:33 AM


IDW Jr. Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Member No.: 47,398
Joined: Aug 18th 2016
Location: Update Profile





Can you hear the difference between Studio master quality (24-96), CD quality (44.1-16) and 320 kbps MP3 files? Find it out!

FLAC, studio master quality [24-96-2.0]
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8nyWN8eP...QUN1aDNyWkh5a0U

FLAC CD quality [44.1-16-2.0]
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8nyWN8eP...NVgwMkc0MGtkakU

MP3 [320 kbps]
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8nyWN8eP...ak1qeEN2bU45bmc
APX
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 07:32 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,327
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Can you?
Yosako
  Posted: Aug 25 2016, 08:40 AM


IDW Jr. Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Member No.: 47,398
Joined: Aug 18th 2016
Location: Update Profile





Yep, even right at the beginning MP3 sounds "flat" and loses spatial clues, the difference between 44.1/16 and 24/96 perhaps could be perceived with better speakers than mine.
APX
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 08:51 AM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,327
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Then I can tell the difference as well.
Yosako
  Posted: Aug 25 2016, 09:20 AM


IDW Jr. Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Member No.: 47,398
Joined: Aug 18th 2016
Location: Update Profile





I used Poison Arrows from Mike Oldfield as source material because it has quite a bit of ultrasonic content above 20,000 Hz and up to 30,000 Hz in the 24-96 version (can be seen with Audacity's spectrum analyzer) which must be lowpass-filtered at 22000 Hz before converting to 44.1/16. It might require VERY good speakers or headphones to be able to play >20kHz ultrasonics to begin with, and you might be a bat if you're able to actually hear'em LOL.

This post has been edited by Yosako on Aug 25 2016, 09:23 AM
Nomake Wan
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 01:15 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,204
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (Yosako @ 7 hours, 40 minutes ago)
Can you hear the difference between Studio master quality (24-96), CD quality (44.1-16) and 320 kbps MP3 files?

QUOTE (APX @ 5 hours, 41 minutes ago)
Can you?

QUOTE (Yosako @ 4 hours, 33 minutes ago)
Yep, even right at the beginning MP3 sounds "flat" and loses spatial clues, the difference between 44.1/16 and 24/96 perhaps could be perceived with better speakers than mine.

So you're saying you can't. derp.gif

EDIT: Shouldn't this be in the computers/tech subforum?

This post has been edited by Nomake Wan on Aug 25 2016, 01:16 PM
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
Tessou
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 01:24 PM


DRAKARYS
Group Icon

Group: ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 19,173
Member No.: 12,263
Joined: Sep 12th 2005
Location: Update Profile





IT SHALL BE DONE.
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
Yosako
  Posted: Aug 25 2016, 01:35 PM


IDW Jr. Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Member No.: 47,398
Joined: Aug 18th 2016
Location: Update Profile





QUOTE (Nomake Wan @ 20 minutes, 2 seconds ago)


So you're saying you can't. derp.gif

EDIT: Shouldn't this be in the computers/tech subforum?

What I said is that while I can hear the difference from MP3 to the original 24-96 file, the difference between CD Quality [44.1-16] and [24-96] is harder to hear as my speakers (which come from a fairly dated 4.1 setup) have a response rated up to 18kHz which ain't the best when it comes to picking high pitched business; I'd need higher quality speakers to hear those subtle notes more clearly. happy.gif

This post has been edited by Yosako on Aug 25 2016, 01:43 PM
Nomake Wan
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 02:01 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,204
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (Yosako @ 25 minutes, 16 seconds ago)
...the difference between CD Quality [44.1-16] and [24-96] is harder to hear as my speakers have a response rated up to 18kHz which ain't the best when it comes to picking high pitched business; I'd need higher quality speakers to hear those subtle notes more clearly.

Right, so you can't. Come back when you've spent oodles of cash on your audio pipeline only to be able to just barely maybe sorta hear a tiny speck of audio artifact at some ridiculous range that's completely unrelated and unimportant to the music in question.

That way I can laugh and go back to listening to music like a normal human being. laugh2.gif
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
xiao
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 05:48 PM


moon★bunny
**********

Group: XIAO
Posts: 4,306
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location:





Common sense says Scientifically speaking Lossless Audio does sound better than Lossy Audio.

Here's the thing though. Every song is mixed & mastered differently, cause every sound engineer is different:

★ Some know how to make a song sound like vanilla-sex-sprinkles in your ears

★ Other sound engineers just make it sound good enough for a YouTube video.

Kids have their parents' credit cards & can't tell the difference in the end ... I know xiao can't! awesome.gif

Is lossless audio better than lossy audio? YES.

Can I hear the difference...? Does weeaboo-Jesus exist? That always depends on the song.
APX
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 06:50 PM


Join the Empire today! Or die, rebel scum!
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 13,327
Member No.: 1,473
Joined: Mar 18th 2004
Location: Update Profile





Thought i was reading a lebon post.
Nomake Wan
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 08:22 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,204
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (xiao @ 2 hours, 33 minutes ago)
Common sense says Scientifically speaking Lossless Audio does sound better than Lossy Audio.

That depends. There are lossy algorithms that sound damn good, and I'm sure there are lossless algorithms that don't work properly. Both of those facts are outside of the scope of this thread, however, which specifically asked if you can hear the difference between a 24-96 FLAC, a 16-44.1 FLAC, and a 320k (44.1? it's not specified by the OP) MP3 of some random song.

The correct answer, and why this thread is completely bogus as per OP's usual threads, is that it depends both on the song (as Xiao correctly pointed out) and on the hardware. Assuming you have a properly-mastered track to work from where there would actually be a difference in audible frequency between the encoding schemes, you still need to have an audio pipeline (sound processor, interface, output device) that can correctly replicate those frequencies. At that point you're not talking a cheap setup, so of course the only people who can answer to the affirmative are people who've already spent the dosh. So either they say yes and are lying in order to justify their purchases, or they actually can.

It's like if I posted a series of grayscale test images in different bit-depths and asked if anyone can see the dithering effect. The only way I can get a correct answer is if someone has a program capable of displaying that image's bit-depth accurately, a graphics card that can output that bit-depth accurately (10-bit OpenGL workflows are only supported on nVidia Quadro and AMD FirePro cards, plus apparently a few other random AMD desktop cards) and a monitor with at least a 12-bit LUT (10+2) and 10-bit matrix. If you have all of that, then yeah, you should be able to provide the correct answer. Too bad it'll cost you an arm and a leg and won't matter unless you're doing something that actually requires such a workflow.

So, as they say on 4chan, here's your (You).
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project
xiao
Posted: Aug 25 2016, 08:36 PM


moon★bunny
**********

Group: XIAO
Posts: 4,306
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location:





QUOTE (APX)
Thought i was reading a lebon post.

QUOTE (Lebon14)
That's it! I'm gonna commit suicide because you insulted the dignity of my FLAC's !!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! NO.

I am the prince of the Musicverse™ and EUROBEAT is CHRIST you imbecile.

Do you know what your dead ancestors think about mp3's !!? Do you!!? You inferior lifeform!

They think that mp3's are SATANIKO the God of demonism You fool!

Lé HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! NO.

You will receive a warming even though I can't do anything but verbally warm you with my ex-tinguished Mod powers.

I said NO.

Now excuse me while Parasite worms bleed out of my French baguette and my ears explode with the silicone wax of your inferior/worthless music's particle boards.

Don't make me laugh. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

SPOILER

I ran my post through Google Translate's Lebonese filter and... the similarities are uncanny! ohmy.gif

QUOTE (Nomake Wan)
The correct answer, and why this thread is completely bogus as per OP's usual threads, is that it depends both on the song (as Xiao correctly pointed out) and on the hardware.

Yeps yeps, Nomake's also right on the ball. Scientifically you can make a gazillion tests with graphs... but in the end it'll depend on the song & person listening to it. Usually people don't need a bunny suit Intel Lab to figure out if a song sounds good or not, they'll tell you right off the bat... this song sounds like shit. laugh.gif (pardon my Mexicanese)

This post has been edited by xiao on Aug 25 2016, 08:46 PM
Yosako
  Posted: Aug 26 2016, 08:40 AM


IDW Jr. Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Member No.: 47,398
Joined: Aug 18th 2016
Location: Update Profile





Lossless has another benefit beyond what you hear: if you ever want to monkey around with sound editors for mixing/fun/whatever, it's better to have a lossless source because otherwise you end up transcoding an MP3 of another MP3 all the way down to garbage.

This post has been edited by Yosako on Aug 26 2016, 08:44 AM
xiao
Posted: Aug 26 2016, 10:46 AM


moon★bunny
**********

Group: XIAO
Posts: 4,306
Member No.: 13,323
Joined: Oct 4th 2005
Location:





QUOTE (Yosako @ 1 hour, 59 minutes ago)
Lossless has another benefit beyond what you hear: if you ever want to monkey around with sound editors for mixing/fun/whatever, it's better to have a lossless source because otherwise you end up transcoding an MP3 of another MP3 all the way down to garbage.

It's better to reproduce the whole song with your own VST's, instruments, & vocals than to mix a .wave file into a DJ set~ awesome.gif

or get the original producer to cough-up the whole Cubase project on their private FTP : instrumental, vocals, presets, & the whole 9 harukas than to work with .wave files... (のヮの)~ ☆
Nomake Wan
Posted: Aug 26 2016, 03:07 PM


ShiMACHaze
**********

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 19,204
Member No.: 5,394
Joined: Feb 5th 2005
Location: Drydock





QUOTE (Yosako @ 6 hours, 27 minutes ago)
Lossless has another benefit beyond what you hear: if you ever want to monkey around with sound editors for mixing/fun/whatever, it's better to have a lossless source because otherwise you end up transcoding an MP3 of another MP3 all the way down to garbage.

This I can agree with. If you're actually producing music, then yes, it's definitely better to have lossless source to introduce as few potential artifacts as possible during production. Now, you could still make the argument that those artifacts are unimportant for 99% of the people who will be listening to your music, but even I cannot argue this point.

After all, I follow the same philosophy with AMV Creation. I encode all my working clips into lossless video formats from their original source (DVD, Bluray, etc) and feed those lossless clips into my editor, only converting to a lossy format once I'm finished. Could I encode them to a decent lossy format? Sure, but I could potentially introduce chroma issues or visual artifacts unnecessarily, not to mention some video editing programs play more nicely with lossless frame-servers than they do lossy frame-servers.

So you've got me there. Of course, all of that has little to do with the topic of this thread--whether the memberbase can hear the difference between 24-96 FLAC, 16-44.1 FLAC and 320k-???? MP3--so thankfully there's no contradiction to be had. cool.gif
Proud Contributor of the Music Section Revival Project