Re: New Thread: Preferred Formats

Happy New Year!! I use EAC and Razor Lame to rip.  I once compared the
original CD to my ripped 320K music file and heard no audible
difference.  My system is fairly high-end and I used a song I always use
when testing speakers at audio stores.  kjb

-----Original Message-----
From: Turtle Beach Audiotron User Forum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brent Aliverti
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 12:31 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AT] New Thread: Preferred Formats


I think the fact that you decided to "do it right and pull WAVs off the
source CDs" underscores a pre-existing internal belief that the WAVs
would sound better than the 320K MP3 files. This belief was validated
when you played back the CD. But it's still not clear whether it was
psychological or real. Only a blind test could tell you that with
certainty.

As an aside, has anyone on this list actually done a blind or ABX test
to support their assertion that .WAV sounds better than (LAME 3.90.3 alt
preset
extreme) MP3? Just curious...

Cheers!
Brent

----- Original Message -----
From: "Abraham, Howard E." <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: [AT] New Thread: Preferred Formats


>I was making a mix CD.  Normally, I only make mix CDs for the car and
>converting 320K back to WAV doesn't bother me.  This time I was making
>a mix CD for someone else so I decided to do it right and pull WAVs off

>the source CDs.  After I was done with the disc I listened to it to
>make sure there weren't any errors.  It was then that I realized how
>good the music sounded compared to the MP3s I was used to hearing.
>This caught me off-guard.  I didn't intend to make a comparison between

>WAV and 320K at all.  I just assumed that 320K was indistinguishable
>from the source, so I never compared them before.  Due to my
>assumptions, I don't think my brain was trying to convince me of
>anything.
>
> I used DBPowerAmp to rip my songs at 320K, CBR, stereo.  I don't know
> which method that software employs.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Turtle Beach Audiotron User Forum
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brent Aliverti
> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:17 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AT] New Thread: Preferred Formats
>
>> Previously, I ripped everything to 320K MP3.  However, after
>> listening to that for over a year I pulled out the original CD and
>> was amazed at the difference between the MP3 and the CD.  I'm slowly
>> converting to WAV now and all new music gets ripped to WAV.  I still
>> keep the MP3 around for portable players.
>
> Hi Howard,
>
> When you compared 320K MP3 to WAV and were amazed by the difference,
> what was your methodology? And which MP3 encoder had you used
> initially? The reason I ask is, if you were comparing the two, and you

> knew which was the WAV and which was the MP3, it's entirely possible
> that your brain was subconsciously influencing your decision more than

> you realize and more than just what your ears told you. The mind is
> tricky that way. If you (like most
> people) are predisposed to think that non-compressed music is always
> better than compressed music, it's possible your mind tipped the scale

> that way to validate your mental model. I'm not saying that you didn't

> hear a real difference, but I would be interested to know if you see
> the same obvious difference with a true blind test (using ABX software

> or with a friend queuing up tracks and not telling you which is which
> until the test is over).
>
> Cheers!
> Brent
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/2004
>