This topic kinda goes along with this one: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=35714, but related with MP3s. Anyways, I was in Computer Applications 2, which is a class that teaches users how to use the advanced features in various computer apps. such as Word or PowerPoint and make things "professional looking". Anyways, we were covering MP3s today and the description the teacher gave for what MP3s this was something that just made me want to scream. Here's what the notes said:


I didn't try correcting the teacher... because it would have been way over her head. And besides, she was just teaching from a "Standard Course of Study", so she was basically teaching what the state issued papers told her... But still.. man, I can't belive they're teaching that...

Hey, she could be teaching that mp3 is the devil and in itself illegal, so.... :-)

Technically that isn't even incorrect, an mp3 does sound better than a pcm wav of equal size and length

(please don't start about TOS #8 for this one )

Yeah I got a good one. "Mp3's are the devils tool, they immitate a familiar song that you're used to hearing, except "antisocial satanic" suggestions are inserted in the process thus eventually corrupting youths who listen to alot of mp3's."

Optical media need not apply it seems.

Teachers don't need to know everything. By reading your post ("such as Word or PowerPoint and make things "professional looking") it seens that in this class your teacher doesn't need to know technical points of view of mp3 or audio coding in general. But i cant really understand why he couldnt just say "mp3 in 128k is cd quality", but "mp3 is better than audio cd".

Mp3 can be better than audio cd(i think its better having a hd full of mp3s and have full and easy access to a lot of albums than switching 1000 cds), but not in this context.

Just don't show the teacher an mp3 spectogram.

soon they'll be teaching that mp3 files just "happen" and don't come from any source files

"Mp3's are made in the internet by napster & kazza unholy fornication."

Whenever a teacher makes this kind of fundamental error, it makes me wonder what else they may be teaching that's wrong. I mean, you caught the MP3 blunder because you already knew better, right? Why should you think this teacher ONLY screwed up on her audio encoding facts? Personally, after that point I'd be double-sourcing everything she told me (or everything in the book, if that's where she got it from). Or at least the stuff that seemed important.

You should never trust any authority too much, this is a very good example for it.
In other words (as Neil Peart wrote in a Rush song): Show me, don't tell me.

True, but she did admit to downloading files illegally though >.>


You're right, she doesn't need to kow the technical aspects behind MP3s, and I don't blame her really, she's just teaching what she needs to. Though, I would have been a bit more comfortable with it had she said that "128k = CD". The overall point of the lecture was that "digital is always better than analogue", which is something that can or cannot be true.

It would have really been better if you'd have corrected her. I mean if you would have said here that's not correct she may have looked at this further and not teaching this wrong thing anymore. This way you would have really invested your time better than opening this thread I think
Sorry, please do not take this as a flame, I just wanted to say with this that it is always good to correct people who are wrong because noone knows everything!

Teachers and textbooks are legendary founts of wisdom; in the grand scheme of things, this is nothing. If you think this is bad, just imagine the butchery they apply to US history on a daily basis.

First off, no offence taken, so don't worry about it. Also, I agree with you completely, but the only reason why I didn't correct her was that niether her, nor the rest of the class, would really care. I would have just been correcting her on something that would have been forgotten in an hour or so anyways. And who knows, maybe the final in this class (which is a standardized test) asks a question about MP3s and that is the right answer?

Well, you see what happened is that while you were making that strangled half-choking, half-snorting sound upon hearing those words, you missed the teacher adding "...than WMA format."

If she said in these words "digital is always better" instead of "MP3 file format (...) sound clearer and have a higher quality.", it wouldnt be so bad, since she could use arguments after the statment telling why its better in a great majority of characteristics, not only audio quality. In the example you gave the whole statement is wrong at that context.

Well, It's just a matter of dont believing in everything our tutors say, especially in technology areas. Or just ask "HOW it makes the sound clearer?". It's better than just say "You're wrong". Usually in situations like this thats my behavior.

An old (slightly harsh) zen koan(riddle):
"in this life we must all 'kill' three things: first we must kill parents; second we must kill Buddha; and last, we must kill the zen teacher"

Not to be taken literally ;-)