|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: Good of you, but hardly seems worth the trouble. nt posted by clarkjohnsen on April 11, 2007 at 15:38:20:
There are more and more products out there where "lossless" compression is part of the package, where a lot of people presume comparable or improved performance. While at the same time, another group of people claiming that we cannot distinguish the difference between Redbook and MP3, with nobody realizing that the "Redbook" may in actuality be degraded ("lossless"), and a lot of false belief that maybe MP3 is all we need. So what we end up getting is even more compromise. Not just in poorer sounding products, but lower quality recordings.There is so much confusion over what's a good or degraded signal, we end up buying what's purportedly "new technology" that is in reality new compromises in performance.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I Think It Is Worth the Trouble, Because..... - Todd Krieger 20:49:42 04/11/07 (9)
- I think you'll find... - rlw 07:08:31 04/12/07 (8)
- This Is Why I'm Doing the Test..... - Todd Krieger 14:36:55 04/12/07 (0)
- I can find a number of people who hear the loss in "lossless" very clearly... - clarkjohnsen 08:38:59 04/12/07 (6)
- You *must* remember... - rlw 08:54:38 04/13/07 (2)
- Re: You *must* remember... - Todd Krieger 13:00:43 04/13/07 (0)
- "I didn't think so...." Your unwonted rudeness has sealed your experiment's fate. nt - clarkjohnsen 09:24:08 04/13/07 (0)
- Re: With which codec? [nt] - alan m. kafton 12:23:20 04/12/07 (2)
- Re: With which codec? [nt] - Todd Krieger 14:42:41 04/12/07 (1)
- By recollection, it was a MS product. - clarkjohnsen 08:34:44 04/13/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]