3 ms·
> People get angry about DRM schemes Yes but thats a thing that degrades something in a catastrophic way, as in I can use the thing one day, and not the next.
by KaiserPro 2mo ago
> People get angry about DRM schemes
Yes but thats a thing that degrades something in a catastrophic way, as in I can use the thing one day, and not the next.
A different randomisation system on something that is a text generator which is designed to be unperceptable sounds like the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3[1]
Done right you won't know the difference, done badly and you will.
[1] ex audio engineer, try me.
- porridgeraisin 2mo ago> try me Good luck explaining that one
- latexr 2mo ago> the people who are annoyed at FLAC vs MP3 What’s the story there? I didn’t know that was a thing and I’m curious to learn more.
- Sharlin 2mo agoMP3 is lossy. FLAC is lossless. So obviously a certain type of people are going to make a religious war out of it.
- KaiserPro 2mo agoEssentially yes. Flac takes a raw .wav and effectively zips it up to shave off a certain amount of space. (there are nuances, I think the compression scheme is designed for streaming.) mp3 is perceptual, so throws away the stuff that humans can't hear. This yields a much smaller file. However its all a sliding scale like PNG vs jpeg. a .jpg with a quality setting of 85 will be almost identical to a .png in visual quality. However if you then edit that jpeg, the image degrades and you start to see artifacts. (hence why memes look like shite as they get older) Its the same with mp3s if you compress the hell out of them, say 64kbit or lower adaptive, then you'll start to hear the tell tail "schlop" noise of mp3-like compression. You might notice it most with cymbals in drum kits. cymbals are wideband noise. as in there are loads of constituent frequencies so if you remove some of the "hidden" frequencies you tend to notice, so they sound more metallic, ironically. But, all of this is solvable, 256+kbit is more than enough, bonus points for higher sampling frequencies. (however you need a decoder that can actually do that sample rate...)
- Tepix 2mo agoInterestingly, in a test c't magazine did a long time ago, the test audience preferred mp3 256kbit over the original.
- milesvp 2mo agoCould be c't magazine accidentally played the mp3 version louder. Human's have a known preference for louder music, and will tend to prefer louder samples over quieter samples. Rumor in the industry is that this was a trick MS used to try to push the WMA format, that they encoded some WMA samples used in some publicized tests at +3dB above the source sample.
- Tepix 1mo agoThey were thorough. It‘s in their 6/2000 magazine.