DSD Vs. 1536kHz

[Everett T]

Or the Tascam DA-3000, which can record at double-DSD 5.6 mHz

Where did you see that?

 

[Doodski]

If you try to tell me FLAC and WAV sounds the same and no difference, I can accept. I too can't hear a difference... But comparing MP3, this is really an insult to high fidelity audio.

I have a track, "Pink Floyd - Pink Floyd Money.flac" and it has a bit rate of 2666kbps and using headphones I compared it to a MP3 and there is no contest the flac is better. I tried a couple of different bit rate MP3 tracks of the same song and they just didn't compare. I don't see how MP3 even when using a well recorded song can compete. I have to say though the MP3 tracks where pretty close.

 

[LeftCoastTim]

This is supposed to be a "science" forum, right? How about injecting some "science" in this thread and show us some double blind (ABX) tests to show validity of some of these claims.

I will wait as long as you want.

 

[solderdude]

The issue here is:
A: there are different encoders and they can have various settings that affect quality.
B: There even is a 'hires' MP3 possible but not all players support this (48/24)
C: Not all commercial MP3 are purposely well encoded to ensure the CD quality copies sell better.
D: While in a lot of songs and well encoded MP3 the music is indistinguishable from 44.1/16 there are certain songs or recorded sounds that are distinguishable.
E: Those that heard fast encoded 128k MP3 and heard a difference automatically assume all MP3 is audible worse.
F: If one wants to show they can distinguish simply show it with an ABX result and make the used files available.

This is something entirely different from claiming DSD vs 1536.

 

[voodooless]

so you need to back your post with evidence. Else, they are just your own opinion.

So you ask, for a blind test, but if someone else does the same:

I don't want such nonsense anymore. Putting on ignore list.

That’s classic . I think your childish ignore list will grow very fast here.

 

[solderdude]

blind test:

one original 44.1/16 file.
Convert to 64kb MP3 lowest quality setting.
Convert to 320k MP3.
Compare MP3 to CD.
Score: 100% detectable. Publish ABX report.

or use the same files.
alternately incorrectly identify the played song.
score close to 50%. publish ABX rapport.

How's an ABX report going to serve as public evidence ?

 

[escksu]

So you ask, for a blind test, but if someone else does the same:

That’s classic . I think your childish ignore list will grow very fast here.

 

[escksu]

I have a track, "Pink Floyd - Pink Floyd Money.flac" and it has a bit rate of 2666kbps and using headphones I compared it to a MP3 and there is no contest the flac is better. I tried a couple of different bit rate MP3 tracks of the same song and they just didn't compare. I don't see how MP3 even when using a well recorded song can compete. I have to say though the MP3 tracks where pretty close.

I think you have to explain it to those who claim MP3 has no difference from WAV/FLAC.

Anyway, me out of here.....

 

[JJB70]

Whether or not differences between CD/FLAC and MP3 can be discerned or not is the wrong question in my opinion. I have no doubt some people can do so. I can do it with certain tracks but it takes serious listening effort focusing on particular aspects. And for many tracks I can't do it. However the real question is whether it makes any difference when just listening to music. If it takes intense concentration and focus on particular sounds then I think that in itself indicates that for listening to music (as opposed to listening to codecs) MP3 is perfectly fine. I ripped all my CDs to MP3 then re-ripped them to FLAC as memory prices plummeted and I thought I may as well have my music lossless. I am playing a psycho-acoustic trick on myself as I think the FLAC versions must be better, in reality there's no difference in terms of music enjoyment. I think MP3 is an one of the most maligned technologies out there as so many audiophiles, reviewers etc are so negative about it when in reality it worked superbly in massively reducing the file size of music in a way which didn't compromise the listening experience.

 

[escksu]

Whether or not differences between CD/FLAC and MP3 can be discerned or not is the wrong question in my opinion. I have no doubt some people can do so. I can do it with certain tracks but it takes serious listening effort focusing on particular aspects. And for many tracks I can't do it. However the real question is whether it makes any difference when just listening to music. If it takes intense concentration and focus on particular sounds then I think that in itself indicates that for listening to music (as opposed to listening to codecs) MP3 is perfectly fine. I ripped all my CDs to MP3 then re-ripped them to FLAC as memory prices plummeted and I thought I may as well have my music lossless. I am playing a psycho-acoustic trick on myself as I think the FLAC versions must be better, in reality there's no difference in terms of music enjoyment. I think MP3 is an one of the most maligned technologies out there as so many audiophiles, reviewers etc are so negative about it when in reality it worked superbly in massively reducing the file size of music in a way which didn't compromise the listening experience.

Let me ask you this, was storage space an issue in the first place??

 

[JJB70]

Let me ask you this, was storage space an issue in the first place??

I think it depends on devices. Possibly not so much for PC's, but it was an issue for portable DAPs, phones and such like. And it definitely eased online bandwidth. We take cheap memory and high speed internet for granted now but it wasn't that long ago that the smaller file size of MP3 was extremely useful.

 

[LeftCoastTim]

I want to see an ABX report between a DSD (or 1536khz) and 16bit/44kHz file. Mp3 discussion here is a distraction.

 

[Frgirard]

Afraid?

 

[danadam]

I won’t, it’s just that I don’t know of any streaming service that uses it.

youtube (the normal one, not music) though I understand that it is a bit different than your usual music streaming services.

 

[danadam]

Maybe it's my ears playing tricks, but I have to go with what sounds best.

Or another interpretation: "..., but I prefer to keep deceiving myself"

 

[audio2design]

Convert a WAV or FLAC yourself to MP3V0 or MP3CB320 and use the highest quality setting and it will be much more difficult when testing blind.
MP3 is not equal to MP3 There are many different MP3 quality settings, not just bitrate.

Bingo. Conversion from uncompressed to MP3 is not a simple formula or even simple churn and burn algorithm. It is a search algorithm and decision tree and different decisions can be made by different processors resulting in different results.

 

[192kbps]

Jeez, we have 1536kHz now?

AKM4191
PCM 64-bit/1536kHz, DSD1024