Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Tech Talk
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A Couple Audiophile Questions
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A Couple Audiophile Questions
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2022 at 10:10
Originally posted by PJMarten PJMarten wrote:

<span style=": rgb248, 248, 252;">Since the only way I can buy certain music is by Itunes, is there any difference at all between ACC 260 and MP3 320 audio files. Another thing is that I like to combine segmented parts of a musical suite together via Vegas, in which I always render as a 320 MP3 file. If I render an ACC file as an MP3 file, do I lose any quality? I guess the same thing can be asked about MP3 to MP3, would re rendering the same audio file type lose quality as well?</span>



Any properly ripped AAC256 or MP3320 file will be transparent to the human ear. If you’re ever in doubt, then download something like Foobar2000 or a similar program that sports a free ABX plug-in. Take a file (FLAC, MP3, AAC, etc) amd make a copy in your prefered codec. Afterwards you will need to volumematch the files, and then plump them into the program. Now see if you can hear a difference.
For what it’s worth: I have still to witness anyone capable of discerning between FLAC (or any other lossless format) and AAC256/MP3 320. I have however seen a lot of people cheat in order to get the result they were after

Making copies out of copies does not alter the sound…at least not until you reach an absurd number of copies.
Best of luck
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17487 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2022 at 12:14
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

...You don't like PDQ Bach?
...

Hi,

I have more PDQ Bach in my collection than you do, and I saw him in concert many years ago, and it was so damn good, that I had to go out of the darn hall for 5 minutes because I was laughing so hard!

I'm not sure that I have ever seen a better concert EVER that had more entertainment and content than 99 out of 100 rock bands ... and talk about creativity ... goodness gracious! BTW, I have an autographed Autobiography by him, which he graciously signed as I brought it to the concert. He was very nice to talk to and not a buffoon as most rockers are!

Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

...
And what do you mean by 'unplug it'? If you mean turn off the amps and echo, well that's a weird comment I don't understand. But if you mean perform the song on just a piano or acoustic guitar, well I'd have to hear example of the songs you're think of.
...

Yep ... take that metal and the loudness out of almost all these bands out there, and the amount of music in it would be negligible and any professor or instructor would likely not give you a good grade!

What is there to understand? That you can't play something you created without the 100k (or 1/2 million if you are DG) grandstand you carry with you? 


Edited by moshkito - March 08 2022 at 12:15
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
I prophesy disaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 4772 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I prophesy disaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 09 2022 at 07:22
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Definition of audiophile by Merriam-Webster: a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction.
 
Definition of audiophile from RationalWiki: a person who listens to the stereo, not the music.
 
Your saying the same thing as Webster, just different words. I like to describe audiophiles as people who want to listen to the music they like in the best possible way.
 
I'm inclined to disagree. All things being equal, everybody would choose the best sound quality over not the best sound quality. It doesn't take being an audiophile to want the best sound quality. But what distinguishes an audiophile from everyone else is the extent to which an audiophile is willing to go to obtain what they regard as the best possible sound. And if sound quality is so important to them, then it is likely that it is more important than the music.
 
 
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

You don't listen to a stereo no matter how good it is.
 
We're not talking about ordinary people here. We're taking about people who are obsessed with the sound quality, and are willing to pay top dollar for it. But the fact of the matter is that if you can hear the difference in sound quality between a top-of-the-line stereo system, and a middle-of-the-road stereo system, then you are listening to the stereo and not the music.
 
 
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

It NEEDS the music to be anything more than a boat anchor.
 
Just because one is playing music doesn't mean that it is the music that one is listening to. As I indicated above, if one is listening to how good the sound quality of the stereo is, then one is really listening to the stereo, not the music.
 
To illustrate my point, about 20 years ago, I recorded all my vinyl records onto hard drive to be burnt onto CD. For some of the albums, I used a wave editor to manually remove the scratches. This involved carefully listening to the recording and, wherever there was a scratch or whatever, manually edit out the defect from the waveform, checking that the edit itself didn't introduce a noticeable defect. The point is that as carefully as I was listening to the record, I wasn't actually listening to the music. Instead, I was listening to the scratches and other noise on the record.
 
 
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

As clever as the statement appears...it really isn't.
 
I think the statement was intended as a joke. I certainly laughed. But like most good jokes, there is an element of truth in it.
 
 
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 09 2022 at 10:17
^NOPE.
Only the music can reveal the true nature of the tool that is interpreting it. It's the differences in the source material that has to be listened to in order to judge the gears performance.

And as to your editing comment, I've done the same with many of my LP's in the past and it can be an arduous process. but that is a very specific operation for listening. Once the process has been completed and burned to CD, voilà, it's the music once again.
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
Davesax1965 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 23 2013
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 2839 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Davesax1965 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 10 2022 at 08:35
I can hear the difference between MP3 320 and VO, FLAC etc etc. 

They're incredibly minor and you have to have a trained musical ear. However. If the original recording was made, say, in the 60's or 70's and recorded by madmen using old biscuit tins, you're merely hearing badly recorded music with the limits on fidelity that produces. 

You cannot polish a turd, but you can roll it in glitter. 

If you weren't there in the room at the time it was recorded, you don't really have a comparison. ;-) 

Is there a difference ? Probably on an oscilloscope. 

Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 10 2022 at 23:51
^Did you volumematch the files beforehand?
If so I’m fairly confident that there are plenty of scientists who would like to meet (and test!) you.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
I prophesy disaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Online
Points: 4772 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I prophesy disaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 11 2022 at 07:09
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

^NOPE.
Only the music can reveal the true nature of the tool that is interpreting it. It's the differences in the source material that has to be listened to in order to judge the gears performance.
 
This misses the point of what I've been saying. What I'm saying is that audiophiles can be so obsessed with sound quality that they are focusing on it rather than the music. I wasn't discussing how sound quality is assessed. Nor was I suggesting that there is no audible difference between a top-of-the-line stereo system and a middle-of-the-road stereo system (although audiophiles do seem to think that they have superhuman hearing... but that's another topic).
 
 
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

And as to your editing comment, I've done the same with many of my LP's in the past and it can be an arduous process. but that is a very specific operation for listening.
 
So you do acknowledge that one can play music but listen quite intently to something that is not the music.
 
 
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

Once the process has been completed and burned to CD, voilà, it's the music once again.
 
Non sequitur. The point of talking about the scratch removal process was to illustrate that one can play music but listen quite intently to something that is not the music. Listening to the music after the scratch removal process has been completed is not relevant to this point.
 
 
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 11 2022 at 11:23
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

^NOPE.
Only the music can reveal the true nature of the tool that is interpreting it. It's the differences in the source material that has to be listened to in order to judge the gears performance.
 
This misses the point of what I've been saying. What I'm saying is that audiophiles can be so obsessed with sound quality that they are focusing on it rather than the music.[EDIT]
Ok, I get what you're saying but at the root of the listening is the MUSIC. The whole point is to make the music sound better, yes? So logic dictates that the way to discern that is by listening to the differences in the source material (MUSIC) on different gear. See what I'm saying? Otherwise, audiophiles would ONLY evaluate the gear via technology that measures objectively the differences (ie: oscilloscopes and RTA's).
 
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

And as to your editing comment, I've done the same with many of my LP's in the past and it can be an arduous process. but that is a very specific operation for listening.
 
So you do acknowledge that one can play music but listen quite intently to something that is not the music.
In a very limited scope, yes of course. But even it you are focusing on say, a snare sound, you are still listening to the MUSIC yes?
 
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

Once the process has been completed and burned to CD, voilà, it's the music once again.
 
Non sequitur. The point of talking about the scratch removal process was to illustrate that one can play music but listen quite intently to something that is not the music. Listening to the music after the scratch removal process has been completed is not relevant to this point.
 
It is in the context of the audiophile evaluating the gear.
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 11 2022 at 11:39
^^ For me you listen to both (gear and music) when listening to a higher end system. The reason you go higher end (for lack of better term) is so you can hear more of the music. You get much more resolution and of course dynamics are much better, retrieval of music is much clearer and it can sound different.

Because I have a much better system than I did 30yrs ago, most of my music from the 70s has a different "feel" and I hear more of it and much higher details....I enjoy my music so much more now than I did, but I did not know that before. 


Edited by Catcher10 - March 11 2022 at 11:39
Back to Top
wiz_d_kidd View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 13 2018
Location: EllicottCityMD
Status: Offline
Points: 1423 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wiz_d_kidd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 12 2022 at 07:45
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

...What I'm saying is that audiophiles can be so obsessed with sound quality that they are focusing on it rather than the music.

They can also be obsessed with their equipment, no matter how bad (or good) the sound is. I knew a fellow once who had a very expensive, high-end system, and he was obsessed with leaving all tone/equalizer controls set at 0dB, regardless of how bad it sounded in his living room (with wood floors, little sound absorption, high ceiling, etc). It drastically needed some boost in the bass, mid-range attenuation, and isolation between the 3x3 ft speaker cabinets and the floor. But he was adamant that the tinny, shrill, harsh pressure waves impinging on my ears was "...how it's supposed to sound because this his high-end equipment".

Audiophile: I love the resonant bass right here, and the cymbals crisp and clear. What a great sound.

Music person: I love the chord change right here, and the poly-rhythms are sublime. What a great composition.
Back to Top
Grumpyprogfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 09 2019
Location: Kansas City
Status: Offline
Points: 11553 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Grumpyprogfan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 12 2022 at 08:25
33ad5cf0c4534f01041503ec2289beb7.jpg
quote-audiophiles-don-t-use-their-equipm


Edited by Grumpyprogfan - March 12 2022 at 08:27
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 12 2022 at 13:01
^ And he knows more than anyone, the production of DSOtM was done at such a high level of craftmanship that almost ALL audiophiles use the album to show off their system, this has been happening for 50 yrs.

I cannot think of any recording done in the past 20years that could rival what Alan did on that album.....So he is partly to blame for his own comment, there is no better compliment than he can receive.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17487 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2022 at 06:35
Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

quote-audiophiles-don-t-use-their-equipm

Hi,

This has been, it could be said, the reason why in 1975 or 1976 I ended up with the ESS HEIL AMT-1 speakers. I took Tangerine Dream's Phaedra to the sound equipment store, and had it played on various speakers and NONE, including more expensive speakers, brought out the quality that the ESS speaker did of the album. I used "Mysterious Semblance ... " for the sample. Even a bunch of guys at the store were impressed by what was showing on the speakers, while one of them kept trying to show me how good the Rolling Stones sounded on another set! 

I wanted something else. Something that could also take on classical music and something that did not, necessarily, have that boomboom sound on it. And to me, this is the biggest issue for a lot of the speakers listed here ... I am not sure that I would use those to listen to some of the purest and best things ever done in recording, of which Alan Parsons is "one of them" but NOT THE ONLY ONE. 

For those that don't know, in the late 60's there was the RCA RED LABEL and it had the best recordings of a lot of music, including classical. Tomita's Debussy album was one of them (later) and Al Stewart had an album in 1973 as well. They did NOT do rock music for a long time, which makes the timing for Alan more opportunistic, by using processes and styles already in use by the RCA Red Seal ideas, which were designed for orchestras although Mario Lanza sure got the most albums ever! And the list was impressive, and it was done WAY BEFORE ALAN PARSONS was even an engineer, or at least just learning. But it had not, as yet gotten out of just doing classical music.

The most important thing about the albums in that seal was that it told us what Abbey Road was doing, that most of us had no idea ... the best equipment and design for music of all kinds, and Alan is (for all intents and purposes) the child of it, and he did the smart thing ... used it for rock music, for people that needed even more detail, when only the Beatles and Rolling Stones could afford the best!

Alan Parsons is nice stuff to listen to ... but then, what are you all comparing it to, when what was in one of those Red Seal albums is not even being given a shot ... the quality was comparable, if not better than what Alan Parsons did, and I think he would agree to that! Or at least agree to be on the same page with it!

BTW, (sidebar) the statement is important for ONE HUGE REASON ... it helps define the moment when you hear something special and you then work on improving it. I'm already thinking that we need to take on that line and study it some, but I think that Alan would agree that he was the student of the art of putting thigs together and he ended up becoming a sort of standard for it ... but to say that Tom Dowd, or George Martin did not have that ability is INSANE ... they brought us some of the greatest music ever, and Alan was nowhere near it. And it was their ability to define and decide how to use it in the studio that made the difference, since none of their bands or artists ever sounded as well when Tom, or George were not around!



Edited by moshkito - March 20 2022 at 06:54
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2022 at 07:11
Thumbs Up
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2022 at 15:09
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

Thumbs Up




ClapBig smile
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2022 at 17:11
Funny thing is, I have no idea how many others I might have. I'll have to do a collection review and report back.
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17487 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 06:49
Originally posted by JD JD wrote:

Funny thing is, I have no idea how many others I might have. I'll have to do a collection review and report back.
Hi,

The wicki'd one has a listing of all titles, and skip it all until you get to 1973 or so, so you don't get Mario'd all over the place, and the over abundance of the same pieces of classical music. 

All you want to remember that this was the best recording of any music in that time, with the possible exception of the Beatles and Rolling Stones, even though, I'm not sure that a better studio makes the Stones even better ... they are better without the studio anyway (when they are in tune and not too loud!!!!!).

(BTW, weird that no one took to Alan's words and/or my reply ... it tells you how much we really care about the message, instead of the medium, which sadly is what this thread is about!


Edited by moshkito - March 21 2022 at 06:50
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2022 at 11:04
Looks like just my Tomita collection.




Edited by JD - March 21 2022 at 11:09
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
jamessavik View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: March 29 2022
Location: Central Mississ
Status: Offline
Points: 31 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jamessavik Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 10 2022 at 22:24
I came about being an "audiophile" backwards according to Parsons. I'm really too poor to be a real audiophile, so I have to be smart about it, so I do a lot of research and look at specs before I buy anything.

I like my old Yes and similar bands (like the Parsons ProjectWink)that need a lot of range-up high and down low. Furthermore, I've got a lot of vinyl and need to handle that too. My system needs to be able to bring out the magic of an album like Close to the Edge or Relayer.

My old system is what most people would call vintage and old Technics amp and turntable that gave up last summer. After looking hard at what was available in my price range, my choice came down to Rotel or Cambridge Audio. I went with a Cambridge Audio Amp and CD player and rounded it out with an Audio-Technica turntable.

Since I listen to a lot of streamed audio, I got a DAC too and can stream to my amp from my computer.

Now I sometimes hear- Maw, Crazy Uncle James is listening to metal again!
There might have been things I missed
But don't be unkind
It don't mean I'm blind
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.578 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.