3 ms·
> can I tell a difference between 16 bit / 44 kHz (CD) and 24 bit / 192 kHz (studio master)? Even under perfect listening conditions (which are very rare) 99.9
by pier25 5y ago
> can I tell a difference between 16 bit / 44 kHz (CD) and 24 bit / 192 kHz (studio master)?
Even under perfect listening conditions (which are very rare) 99.99% of people won't be able to tell the difference.
The vast majority of people can't tell the difference between a 44.1Khz/16 bits .wav and a 128kbps MP3.
- boc 5y agoThat's not true. If you said 320kbps MP3 then maybe I'd agree. 128 sounds crushed as hell on most decent setups.
- pier25 5y agoHave you done a proper AB blind test to verify that? I studied sound engineering and we did that test. Most people failed and it was in a studio environment. I couldn't imagine regular people not interested in audio with consumer gear. Edit: If you do the AB test, you really need to get pretty close to 100% success to claim you can hear the difference. Anything closer to 50% is just random luck.
- lostgame 5y ago>> The vast majority of people can't tell the difference between a 44.1Khz/16 bits .wav and a 128kbps MP3. ...are you kidding? I think most people could easily tell the difference between a CD and a 128kbps MP3 if asked to listen to it hard enough. That, or play it in a club loud enough - and watch everyone cringe. As the other commenter said - 320kbps - alright, sure. But 128kbps? Come on.
- zbuf 5y agoWith a modern encoder, I think that's virtually guaranteed, yes. Most peoples idea of "horrible" 128kbps seems to be skewed by the early days of MP3 -- which does mean there are horrible files and encoders out there, yes. But a modern LAME encoder is streets ahead at 128kbps.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]