So,
So, distinguishing beween source (16/44 for most of us) and a compressed version (LAME 'extreme', or 'insane' par example) has to be "proved" via ABX?
Bollocks.
I've just been chilling to 'Rage Against The Machine' on Foobar via APE encodes I made a few months back.
No way is ANY GODDAMN "lossy codec" going to sound the same. Period.
If you can't hear it, well, you must be hard of hearing. (i.e - DEAF).
byeee,
RF
Full Version: [USELESS] Codecs?
QUOTE(RockFan @ Apr 13 2004, 04:10 PM)
So,
So, distinguishing beween source (16/44 for most of us) and a compressed version (LAME 'extreme', or 'insane' par example) has to be "proved" via ABX?
Bollocks.
I've just been chilling to 'Rage Against The Machine' on Foobar via APE encodes I made a few months back.
No way is ANY GODDAMN "lossy codec" going to sound the same. Period.
If you can't hear it, well, you must be hard of hearing. (i.e - DEAF).
byeee,
RF
So, distinguishing beween source (16/44 for most of us) and a compressed version (LAME 'extreme', or 'insane' par example) has to be "proved" via ABX?
Bollocks.
I've just been chilling to 'Rage Against The Machine' on Foobar via APE encodes I made a few months back.
No way is ANY GODDAMN "lossy codec" going to sound the same. Period.
If you can't hear it, well, you must be hard of hearing. (i.e - DEAF).
byeee,
RF
It depends...
on the listening material, the listener's innate hearing ability, on his familiarity with the type of artifacting involved, the listening equipment (e.g., headphones vs. speakers), and on whether other processing is involved (e.g., DSP, equalization, etc.).
The short answer is that to many, if not most casual listeners, under most conditions, listening to most musical material, Lame extreme or insane will be transparent.
ff123
I really hope you're just drunk...
Closed for obvious reasons.
Closed for obvious reasons.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.