Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

24/192 music downloads are silly

xiph.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 443 posts

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#11

Post by TarpitCarnivore »

I would imagine in most cases the quality of the rip wont matter if the production on the album, or song, isn't very good. A poorly produced and mastered album wont sound good whether it's 128kbps or a full lossless rip.

I think similar to a lot of things there are some people out there who can notice the difference, but the percentage is likely very small. Most probably are telling themselves it sounds better, but as the article points out they're likely guessing when it comes to doing A/B tests.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#12

Post by bjt2n3904 »

While the 30/33 kHz inter modulation test is interesting, how would the 30/33 kHz tones get there in the first place? Aren't there low pass filters and shielding on most studio equipment to attenuate EMI? Not to mention, the inter modulation products are 60 dB below the 30/33 kHz tones, I'm sure you wouldn't be able to hear them...

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#13

Post by justathrow2k »

huuu wrote: post #10
z3ugma wrote: post #4

I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.

He knows what he is talking about. But I think his tone is somewhat snobbish because he is a little tired of the nonsense that is spread about music theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Montgomery

Nitpick here, but I think you mean signal theory or something else? Music theory is an entirely different can of worms.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#16

Post by masklinn »

TarpitCarnivore wrote: post #11

I would imagine in most cases the quality of the rip wont matter if the production on the album, or song, isn't very good. A poorly produced and mastered album wont sound good whether it's 128kbps or a full lossless rip. I think similar to a lot of things there are some people out there who can notice the difference, but the percentage is likely very small. Most probably are telling themselves it sounds better, but a…

> I think similar to a lot of things there are some people out there who can notice the difference

Have you considered reading the article? Because it's reasonably clear that you can't "notice the difference" and be a human.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#17

Post by masklinn »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #2

Such "studio" formats don't make sense for end-user listening, but they make sense as inputs to further processing, mixing, etc. Having a pile of headroom in frequency and amplitude means that after further processing you can subsequently output a sensible 16-bit 48kHz file without loss. If you start with a 16-bit 48kHz file and then do a pile of processing, you won't necessarily preserve the same degree of quality.

This he notes, repeatedly. The context of the post is 24/192 for distribution to end-users (Neil Young's PonoMusic)

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#18

Post by errantspark »

I once spent ~2 hours explaining all of this (well maybe not all of it) to a friend of mine who was studying sound design at the time. He didn't believe me.

I even transcoded some 24/192 FLAC Pink Floyd I had lying around and made him do a double blind test to show him that he'd prefer the slightly louder song every time, even if the louder song was 192kbps vs the FLAC. He did. He still doesn't believe me.

He still thinks he can hear the difference between FLAC and MP3 to this day. He works as a sound engineer now.

I don't think any amount of reasoning will make some people change their minds. Some people buy $500 wooden knobs to make their volume pots sound better. (or was that a hoax? i can't tell anymore)

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#19

Post by RyJones »

tunesmith wrote: post #3

The summary here is to just rip everything losslessly and then to go ahead and use 44.1/16 since it's actually better in some ways and not worse in others.

Indeed. I rip everything losslessly and batch re-encode when I switch music players (man, I miss my Zunes)

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#20

Post by Confusion »

z3ugma wrote: post #4

I'm not familiar enough with the author's work to know if his credentials merit it, but to me his tone is unbelievably snobbish and offputting.

I guess his exasperation with audiophiles must be leaking through. Since I feel the same way the tone actually resonates with me and only signals confidence in the correctness of the facts presented.
Post reply on HN