4 ms·

Truth. Mp3's sound horrid IMO.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
New truth: at sensible bit rates, most people cannot differentiate mp3s and wav in double blind tests. New truth: at very high bit rates, almost nobody can.
- TylerE 6y ago
  And frankly, if you replace MP3 with a newer decent codec like Vorbis or AAC that doesn't have obvious glaring issues, "very high" isn't all that crazy high either. That said, disk is cheap, and FLAC is easy piece of mind.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
    Disk is indeed cheap. The time to re-rip 1000 CDs, however, it not :(
    - ghaff 6y ago
      Yeah. I have a big bin of CDs in my attic, many/most of which I ripped as medium-quality MP3s. Realistically, given my so so hearing, I'm not going to go redo all those at this point--especially given that so much of my music listening is streaming at this point anyway.
- dublin 6y ago
  That's true, but psychoacoustic compression models like MP3 work precisely because they're throwing out what most people can't hear. That said, people are different, and some people can hear the difference. My ears are probably only average, but my eyes are (or were) significantly "faster" than average: Until I was well into my 30s (fortunately, this has faded with age!), fluorescent lights were pretty much just like a disco strobe to me - as a teen I could literally see them flashing, even though the phosphors moderated it a bit. (The 2000's flirtation with those wretched CF twisty bulbs brought this roaring back, as almost all of them flashed enough to be really annoying to me.) Just like there are some (very rare) women who are tetrachromes, it's reasonable to expect that there are some with "golden ears". The cool thing about Bob Carver was that he didn't just rely on his (obviously very good) ears, but also on his knowledge, intuition/insight, and equipment. Just amazing. Thanks to OP for this.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
    > it's reasonable to expect that there are some with "golden ears". I'm not convinced, but I will graciously concede that it could be so. This would not, however, justify the claim in the GP that "MP3s sound horrid". Also, I would say that from reading the article, I don't think Carver relied on his ears much at all.
    - dublin 6y ago
      While he didn't rely on them that much other than as a confirmation, it clearly surprised the folks at Stereophile that he was instantly able to pick up on the subtleties they noticed.

New truth: at sensible bit rates, most people cannot differentiate mp3s and wav in double blind tests. New truth: at very high bit rates, almost nobody can.

TylerE 6y ago
And frankly, if you replace MP3 with a newer decent codec like Vorbis or AAC that doesn't have obvious glaring issues, "very high" isn't all that crazy high either. That said, disk is cheap, and FLAC is easy piece of mind.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  Disk is indeed cheap. The time to re-rip 1000 CDs, however, it not :(
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Yeah. I have a big bin of CDs in my attic, many/most of which I ripped as medium-quality MP3s. Realistically, given my so so hearing, I'm not going to go redo all those at this point--especially given that so much of my music listening is streaming at this point anyway.
dublin 6y ago
That's true, but psychoacoustic compression models like MP3 work precisely because they're throwing out what most people can't hear. That said, people are different, and some people can hear the difference. My ears are probably only average, but my eyes are (or were) significantly "faster" than average: Until I was well into my 30s (fortunately, this has faded with age!), fluorescent lights were pretty much just like a disco strobe to me - as a teen I could literally see them flashing, even though the phosphors moderated it a bit. (The 2000's flirtation with those wretched CF twisty bulbs brought this roaring back, as almost all of them flashed enough to be really annoying to me.) Just like there are some (very rare) women who are tetrachromes, it's reasonable to expect that there are some with "golden ears". The cool thing about Bob Carver was that he didn't just rely on his (obviously very good) ears, but also on his knowledge, intuition/insight, and equipment. Just amazing. Thanks to OP for this.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  > it's reasonable to expect that there are some with "golden ears". I'm not convinced, but I will graciously concede that it could be so. This would not, however, justify the claim in the GP that "MP3s sound horrid". Also, I would say that from reading the article, I don't think Carver relied on his ears much at all.
  - dublin 6y ago
    While he didn't rely on them that much other than as a confirmation, it clearly surprised the folks at Stereophile that he was instantly able to pick up on the subtleties they noticed.