2 ms·
You can literally point to artifacts in a spectrogram which exist within the range of human hearing with many lossy codecs. It doesn't even have to be subjectiv
by soulofmischief 3y ago
You can literally point to artifacts in a spectrogram which exist within the range of human hearing with many lossy codecs. It doesn't even have to be subjective.
- pja 3y agoSure - these codecs lose information. The clue is in the name! The question is can you hear those differences, to which the answer is basically no, for a modern codec at high enough bitrate. "enough" is 128kbit or more in blind listening tests.
- soulofmischief 3y agoThe answer is not "basically no", and the qualifier of the initial argument was specifically 320kbps mp3. No one here is arguing that modern, high-bitrate codecs aren't much better at producing imperceptible artifacts. But 128kbps is absolutely not enough in blind listening tests, 128kpbs typically produces a ton of perceptible artifacts. You're just making that up.
- pja 3y agoYes, I should have caveated that: 128kbit mp3 from a decent encoder is transparent to average listeners. To a “trained” ear that is listening out for the differences? Sure, those are perceptible. But those aren’t normal people.