3 ms·
I agree in principle, however I disagree with the logic insofar as anyone who is listening to music through Pro Logic (or a similar matrix decoder) is by defini
by sjwright 10y ago
I agree in principle, however I disagree with the logic insofar as anyone who is listening to music through Pro Logic (or a similar matrix decoder) is by definition not a target audience for pedantic degrees of audio signal preservation.
- dTal 10y agoNot really sure what you're trying to say. Why am I not allowed to be in the "target audience" for not wanting artefacts in my music? Your reasoning seems to be "only deluded, pedantic audiophiles want lossless, and audiophiles don't listen though matrix decoders". But that begs the question - the whole point of relating my personal experience was to show how a perfectly reasonable and commonplace listening style could benefit from lossless encoding.
- sjwright 10y agoPlease don't put words in my mouth. I would never say that you have to be deluded or pedantic or an audiophile in order to justify lossless audio file. And I would never ever say that "audiophiles don't listen though matrix decoders". I completely accept that matrix decoding is a legitimate way to listen to music. I do it myself on occasion. But even before you throw lossy compression into play, it's worth acknowledging that Pro Logic decoding of a non-Pro Logic signal is hit-and-miss at best, which can often trip up or be generally unpleasant with many types of material.