3 ms·
Some of the numbers in the article are unsourced and highly questionable. 130-140dB dynamic range of hearing? That's the difference between an anechoic chamber
by opencl 8y ago
Some of the numbers in the article are unsourced and highly questionable. 130-140dB dynamic range of hearing? That's the difference between an anechoic chamber (~10-20dB) and enough sound pressure to literally rupture your eardrums (~150dB). Maybe you can technically perceive that dynamic range... once.
I certainly agree that artifacts in 128kbps MP3s are noticeable but the assertion that 320kbps AACs or MP3s created with modern encoders are audibly different from uncompressed audio really needs some evidence. Every single double blind test I have seen conducted between them has shown that nobody can tell.
- cogman10 8y ago128kbps aac or opus are going to be transparent. MP3 is such an old standard (1993). The fact that is still the reference and used is little crazy.
- rplst8 8y agoIf you don't think there is a huge difference between 140 and 150db then you don't understand decibels. I can most certainly tell the difference between 320kbps lossy and red book audio on well done recordings.
- Retric 8y agoThe problem is people’s hearing range shrinks so much at low dB as to include it in ‘hearing range’ is meaningless. Similarly, people can detect pain at 140db, but they don’t differentiate sounds. Ex at 60db detecting 100hz sounds is easy, at 20db it’s outside of human hearing range.