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

351–360 of 443 posts

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#351

Post by DiabloD3 »

carlob wrote: post #304
cthalupa wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, we have to define, in your opinion, what would make a pair of headphones shitty. If you are going to reduce them to the basest level of what the purpose for a speaker or headphone is, to reproduce the input sound, then yes, they are shitty, because they are not good at that. From a purely objective standpoint, you are going to have to judge them based on that. Why would you want the speakers or headphones to make…

> You could buy a pair of Sony MDR-7506 that measure similarly (IIRC, a bit better, even) for $85. Or Superlux HD668B which can be found for $30 last time I checked.

Or if you're willing to spend more, Beyerdynamic DT-770/880/990 family stuff.

Or if you want IEMs, you're not going to beat Hifiman RE-400 for any IEM under $300.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#352

Post by hvidgaard »

cthalupa wrote: post #181
threeseed wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Self-styled audiophiles are, by and large, idiots with way too much money plagued by magical thinking. Not just that. But the arrogance and fanboyism is rampant. God forbid you ever consider buying a Bose or Beats product.

Bose and beats* are by, every /objective/ measure, shitty products. Subjectively, you might like them, but the faithfulness of audio reproduction is not a subjective matter. You can play a tone and measure how well that tone is actually played back. You can then also objectively compare things that produce that playback quality at various price points and figure out if they're priced competitively. There is plenty of…

As far I've tried NC headphones, nothing comes even close to what Bose offer with QC25, any other brand I've tried cancel out less noise than the bose. Sound quality might not be the best, but the intented environment is the limiting factor anyway, and they do a great job at dealing with environment noise.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#353

Post by DiabloD3 »

tempestn wrote: post #175
anigbrowl wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are low-budget audiophile products, ie they are still marketed mainly to boost the ego of purchasers. There are three brands of headphones that pros use: Beyerdynamic (typically DT-100 or DT-770), Sennheiser (typically HD-5/650) and Sony (typically MDR-7506/9). Beyerdynamics have somewhat better isolation so they're more popular in music studios, Sonys are more comfortable when you have to wear them all day so…

From all the reviews I've seen, Bose noise-cancelling headphones are pretty much the best you can buy. Especially if you want earbuds (the QC20s). They're extremely expensive though. Do you (or anyone) have suggestions for alternatives?

Bose QC15s and QC20s are the best active noise-cancelling headphones out there... but the problem is, hey still have very mediocre sound, but they do the noise-cancelling part well. They are also massively overpriced.

Sennheiser HD280 Pros have extremely good passive isolation, and will beat QC15s at a fraction of the price, in both isolation and audio quality.

So yes, Bose still loses when you look at the big picture. Bose is very good at marketing, they are not very good at making quality audio.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#354

Post by [deleted] »

asimpletune wrote: post #345

So I appreciate everyone's point of view and applaud using an empirical approach, for those of you who share the author's point of view, but I disagree unfortunately. For those of us who have worked in DSP, either using it or implementing new things with it, there's s highly mathematical reason to record the source of you audio with a higher sample rate than what the author suggests is a generous maximum. It has to d…

[deleted]

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#355

Post by DiabloD3 »

stinkytaco wrote: post #207
agumonkey wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other side of their spectrum, I went "near" an audiophile shop test booth and I was sucked by clarity and density of the sound in the air (this was a drum solo track). Some audiophileness is good. I'll head back to my 40$ crappy mp3 player now.

I actually think you'll find many "audiophiles" enamored of the Sansa Clip Plus and Zip, which fall into that price range. Probably the most highly thought of MP3 players after the iPod classic 5.5.

Now that Android supports USB DACs, you can just get portable DAC+Amp combos that you can stick in your pocket with your phone. No need for a dedicated device anymore.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#356

Post by CHY872 »

asimpletune wrote: post #345

So I appreciate everyone's point of view and applaud using an empirical approach, for those of you who share the author's point of view, but I disagree unfortunately. For those of us who have worked in DSP, either using it or implementing new things with it, there's s highly mathematical reason to record the source of you audio with a higher sample rate than what the author suggests is a generous maximum. It has to d…

I'm sorry, but if you have a DSP background you should at least be able to give a better explanation than 'trust me'. I have a really tiny DSP background (a 3 week lecture course), but specific questions that would help convince me of your point of view would be:

- Sampling at a frequency 2f lets us reproduce the specific component of every frequency f (I've idealised here, but I'm assuming we've filtered correctly). If f is greater than the maximum frequency we can hear, why does it matter at all?

- When the entire field of digital signal processing (and anyone who uses it, such as a sound engineer) relies on such math from top to bottom to make the recording process work, why should we ignore it as soon as we start experimenting and simply consider what our ears tell us? Why should you ask the question 'why does my mathematical knowledge of a subject fall short of explaining what many people seem to experience?' in the first place? It seems to imply that your ears are more accurate than a century of study, which at least seems arrogant.

- A number of the points you've made (regarding people hearing different things) were explained in some way in the article. What are your views on that?

I'm largely convinced that you're wrong (you've given no specific justification for any of your points), but I would be interested to hear what you have to say.

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#358

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #354
asimpletune wrote: post #345

So I appreciate everyone's point of view and applaud using an empirical approach, for those of you who share the author's point of view, but I disagree unfortunately. For those of us who have worked in DSP, either using it or implementing new things with it, there's s highly mathematical reason to record the source of you audio with a higher sample rate than what the author suggests is a generous maximum. It has to d…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: 24/192 music downloads are silly

#359

Post by danohuiginn »

tsotha wrote: post #280
masklinn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people buy $500 wooden knobs to make their volume pots sound better. (or was that a hoax? i can't tell anymore) Some people buy small pyramids to elevate their cables off the floor, some people buy mats to put onto your CDs before putting the CD in a player ( http://dagogo.com/millenniums-m-cd-mat-carbon-cd-damper-revi... ), some people buy $1000+/meter digital interconnect cables ( http://www.theabsolutesound…

>Self-styled audiophiles are, by and large, idiots with way too much money plagued by magical thinking. I agree on the "plagued by magical thinking" part, but not all these people are idiots. Some of them are quite intelligent, in fact. I think they just want to be "in the know", and are able to suspend their normal skepticism in order to belong. One of the smartest and most productive programmers I ever met was take…

The most generous approach to audiophiles is to allow for a placebo effect. i.e. they get greater enjoyment from listening to what they believe is a perfect sound system, regardless of whether the gold-plated cables actually do anything.
Post reply on HN