Any audiophiles here?

^It's definitely not as compressed as Death Magnetic, otherwise it would probably be clipping, but I can't hear any clipping going on in Planetary Duality, but it's quite compressed enough that there is an audible pumping effect, which is quite unfortunate. Death Magnetic, even if I liked the music, which I don't (well, I don't hate it, just don't particularly love it either), the sheer amount of compression on the master bus alone would be reason for me not to listen to it.
Indeed, I know Obscura's Cosmogenesis, great album, but again mastered a bit too loud for my tastes. When it comes to the kind of loudness I prefer, think the debut Rage Against the Machine album. Great level of dynamics and still fairly loud without being over the top.
Personally I think you'd be better off with a stereo system for that price too, since after all less components and more money going into each individual component means those 2 speakers will sound better than a 5.1 system, although I realize you probably wont go out and get a new system to listen on. I just tend to be very comfortable listening on stereo, but that's just me I suppose.


Edited by Petrovsk Mizinski - September 11 2009 at 01:05

Eh, I tend to think listening fatigue comes from over compressed albums.
I don't get that problem much since I don't listen to stuff very loud, since anyway I'm a musician that doesn't want to bust his hearing.
But I do notice, certain albums in my collection, I cannot listen to them even moderately loudly (such as The Faceless album "Planetary Duality", Gojira's album "From Mars to Sirius" and a few others) for the entire duration of the album, otherwise I get a minor headache and I just feel like I've had a barrage of noise shot at me.
Planetary Duality in particular is bad, although it doesn't have much in the way of audible clipping, the master bus limiting is so ridiculous the sound constantly "pumps" which is very irritating to listen to.
Although I tend to master bus limit my music fairly loud, it's nowhere near clipping/audible pumping levels and I like it that way, even if it means I'm not in the race of the loudness wars.

Anyway, MP3 vs loseless continued, I tend to rip my stuff at 256Kbps these days. Sounds good to me, eh.
I don't have a massive hard drive (300 GB) plus I need to keep it very freed up to maintain system stability and performance for doing audio stuff (recording, mixing etc) and since I don't hear a difference at 256Kbps, it suits me fine and doesn't overload my hard drive. And believe me, I've been spending hours mixing stuff, constantly doing tiny refinement to my guitar tone/bass guitar tone most people wouldn't even be able to hear, so it's not like I don't have an ear for detail.

Some people own 50 000 USD sound systems. That's awesome and I'm jealous of them, but thinking rationally I see no point in owning one for myself because the music I listen to just doesn't take advantage of it.
If you listen to heaps of jazz, fantastic, because those ultra high end systems really work with that kind of music, the soundstaging, the perception of depth (being able to hear where instruments are in a room, in a sense)/ how tall/wide it is/sounds.
Honestly jazz and other music that has lots of 'space' in it makes up a small portion of my listening. I'm mainly a rock music guy and a big heavy metal fan as some would know by now.
So the benefits of such expensive audio systems is entirely lost, because there is just too much going on in the music I generally listen to. Everything is just competing for it's own space in the sonic spectrum, no matter how well mixed it is, it's just a fact when you have stuff like that going on you just can't give it heaps of depth.
Quad tracked electric guitars, bass guitar parts that are essential for keeping all the low end down, there just isn't any space in the mix to have any proper perception of depth and space that you'd hear in jazz or something like that.
I've spoke to some guys on other forums about this, and this was their complaint basically, that as I said, the benefits were just lost on music that revolves around high gain double/quad tracked guitars and they felt deeply disappointed by that.
So really, I think at most I'll end up with a 5000 AUD system when I move out of home and I'll be fine with that.
It'll be good enough to take advantage of the music I like that has amazing production (like This Godless Endeavor by Nevermore, End of Heartache by Killswitch Engage and not have to think "Well at least I  didn't spend 50 grand, I don't have enough jazz" lol.
Chances are I'd be spending even more on my studio monitors by that stage anyway.

^ so in essence you're saying that those subtle differences can only be heard after longer listening sessions? Call me naive, but in my book prolonged listening means fatigue, not relaxation. And independently of the source, too ... I know that some audiophiles will immediately say that listening to mp3 means fatigue and listening to vinyl means relaxation ...

http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html

I would call that a good audio system ... case in point.

Nobody's contesting the fact that during mp3 compression data is lost. What I am contesting is that this loss is audible even on high end systems, as long as high bitrates and modern encoders (like LAME) are used.

^ there are many things that can mess with the signal though when you simply connect a mp3 player to your system ... and how were the mp3s encoded, does the mp3 player do any processing, etc.

Sacred 22 wrote: I can tell you that I can hear a difference and it is not something of a dream either. In fact many of the people who come over and listen can hear the difference. You only have to live with a quality system to fully appreciate the organic sound that it offers compared to any computer system I have ever listened to. You may have a fine sounding computer based system but I'm not giving up what I have for a computer based system, maybe at gunpoint, but that's about it.

I never said that your system doesn't sound better than mine ... actually I'm quite sure that it does. My active Logitech 5.1 speakers cost 80 EUR (that's amp + subwoofer + 5 speakers), and what I am saying is that they sound much, much better than any other system in that price range, and that they can even compete with a typical 500-1000 EUR hifi system (I have such a system, too), especially when you sit in front of the computer, at a 1-2 m range.

Please tell me: How do you conduct these listening tests? Are they really "blind" tests, with neither of the contestants knowing which is the mp3, and which is the real CD?

A Person wrote: Is it possible to go to a studio, record the velocity and position of every air molecule, and some how retrace that to the air displaced by the amps originally used to record a piece of music and somehow turn that data into sound? Would it be more accurate than vinyl?

Edited by Dean - September 07 2009 at 19:57

Sacred 22 wrote: ^^^^   If I play a MP3 track and the same track in lossless I can certainly hear the difference in both detail and dynamics but to be honest you do need a system that resolves well in order to notice the difference from my experience. Even my so called non audiophile friends can hear the difference, but on most computer based systems I dare say you would be hard pressed to notice much of a difference.

I do agree, there are noticable differences between the several bitrates, which I certainly can hear in just one track played in both formats. A spectral analysis can prove it :




P.S.

Flac=Lossless=Cd (compressed file)
mp3 = lossy

I'd say, in case of mp3,  (if it's not possible to get a flac file which is always better ) a  V0 vbr ripping is preferable than 320kps, as V0 encodes at high quality when it needs to, like at the loud parts, and doesn't unnecesarily waste space by encoding at high bitrate at the quieter parts. So it's the same quality [the difference is negligible] with a more sensible file size.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Sacred 22 wrote: ^^^^   If I play a MP3 track and the same track in lossless I can certainly hear the difference in both detail and dynamics but to be honest you do need a system that resolves well in order to notice the difference from my experience. Even my so called non audiophile friends can hear the difference, but on most computer based systems I dare say you would be hard pressed to notice much of a difference. http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html They used high end equipment and the test was inconclusive ... and I can't hear a difference either, not on my low-cost (but quite well sounding) PC speakers nor via my studio quality audio interface and AKG headphones. And of course you always have to take into account the bitrate of the mp3s and the quality of the encoding algorithm. I think that with a modern encoder and bitrates of well above 200kbit you really can't hear any difference anymore, no matter how good your ears or equipment. BTW: Of course it's entirely possible that you *think* you hear a difference ... it's just how our brain works. If we are sure of something and expect a certain experience, the brain will try to make it happen for us. Which, in this case, is fairly easy to accomplish since the two sources (if ripped/encoded properly) are virtually indistinguishable.

Digital technology has gotten so good over the last few years that as good as vinyl can be I do enjoy the versatility of digital. The better systems do reproduce very well in the digital domain.