Open Source Guitar Pedal

[Martin Naef]

Hi Marc

M-.-n wrote:
>> Just read your entry regarding mp3 quality, and I have to say I'm rather 
>> surprised that you heard such a big difference between the MP3 and the 
>> FLAC. I wouldn't doubt a difference, but on an IPod with background 
>> noise on the street???
>>
>> It would be interesting to re-encode with the same bitrate from the FLAC 
>> files and then listen again.

> Well, although encoded by Mr. Reznor crew, the mp3s where only 192k and 
> of course, at that rate, there is a huge difference. The FLAC where a 

That obviously brings up a debate of what you consider "huge" - given 
that the majority of people can't even distinguish a 128k MP3 from the CD.

> lot more spacious too... unless you mean the mp3's could be off from the 
> FLAC version ?

That's exactly my suspicion. I wouldn't be surprised if there was more 
difference between them than just the encoding.

For example, I have Enigma's "Mea Culpa" both on CD and DVD. The DVD 
version sounds a lot better in my opinion - but that's definitely not 
the encoding, but a subtle difference in mastering, anticipating a 
different "standard" listening environment.

> The idea behind the post was that even a guy like me that does 
> appreciate music subtleties goes with the flow and continues to listen 
> to dreadful version even tho it has perfectly baked version handy abd 
> already paid for. I find it kind of scary. It's like if I went to mc 
> donald's to eat every meal.

It just shows the power of inertia. At the same time, it also shows that 
there is a lot more to music than just sound quality - you also enjoyed 
the record in MP3 quality, right?

>> music quality isn't so much limited by the distribution medium (CD), but 
>> rather by the production "values" - read overcompression and limiting 

> These days the distribution medium *isn't* the CD anymore. You think 

True. But it's still the benchmark against which quality is measured. 
And bandwidth, although cheap, is still not unlimited. So is there 
really anything relevant to be gained by putting out a 192k 32bit 
version just because we can? How much extra would you pay for a 
96k/24bit version over 44k/16bit? Do you have SACD at home?

I don't have an answer ready, but as mentioned above, I'd rather have 
music mastered musically again instead of downloading gigabytes of 
ear-bleeding stuff...

Bye
Martin

-- 
http://www.navisto.ch
http://www.myspace.com/navisto