 |
| |
|
|
nostromo
|
 |
Montréal, Québec
Mar 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
WMP10 will only rip to 192Kbps WMA by default, so you should look into...other means.
|
I believe you're wrong. I have WMP 10 and all my songs are ripped at a 240 to 355 Kbps (variable bit rate). And if I rip them at lossless, it jumps to 470 to 940 Kbps! I'm not quite that anal about sound quality. Anyway, I probably couldn't hear the difference.
Man, these microdrive MP3 players are tempting... I could have the mini iPod for 225 $ Cdn. But for 70 $ more, you have the Zen micro, with an extra GB, better sound quality and better ear buds. The best price I found here in Montreal for the Zen micro is 295 $ Cdn.
Last edited by nostromo on 18-03-2005 at 07:21
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:34
|
|
The problem with Agathon's argument is heard audio fidelity is only as strong as the weakest link.
If the DSP and/or DAC you use introduces electronic noise in place of the signal (that is, "bits" of the bitstream are corrupted), it will directly impact other factors later (headphone adapter, headphone cable, headphone quality, driver size, etc), not to mention other factors such as THD and crosstalk.
SNR numbers play a rather significant part in digital audio fidelity, it's simply part of the science that some people choose to believe is art to justify some absurd opinions.
Whether it sounds "better" or not is art, whether it's accurate reproduction is science. It's 2005, it's time for some people here to realize that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001
time: 13:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
But the only way to really test audio equipment is to compare the sound yourself by doing listening tests. If you really care about the sound you get, you will do that, and it will ensure that you get something you like.
And that in the end, is the only thing that anyone can really say. |
The word.
The thing I don't understand is why people care so much about what other people buy.
I compared the zen touch with the iPod and I like the iPod better. The sound quality is about the same, but the zen touch is a cheap piece of plastic crap in my opinion.
Boris likes the zen touch better. Fine, what do I care.
As for giving advise, all I'd say is spend money on a good set of earphones simply because you pay for what you get and the earphones make all the difference.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
The problem with Agathon's argument is heard audio fidelity is only as strong as the weakest link.
If the DSP and/or DAC you use introduces electronic noise in place of the signal (that is, "bits" of the bitstream are corrupted), it will directly impact other factors later (headphone adapter, headphone cable, headphone quality, driver size, etc), not to mention other factors such as THD and crosstalk.
SNR numbers play a rather significant part in digital audio fidelity, it's simply part of the science that some people choose to believe is art to justify some absurd opinions.
Whether it sounds "better" or not is art, whether it's accurate reproduction is science. It's 2005, it's time for some people here to realize that. |
Again - from Wikipedia
quote:
The designer of a system for sound reproduction needs to be able to measure the system's performance in a number of areas. While this is not a measure of quality but of quantity, it is a fact that certain quantifiable measurements must be of a certain order to assure quality. That said, it is possible to design systems that sound terrible nevertheless — in other words, a quality system will attain certain measurements, but the existence of those measurements does not guarantee quality. |
Everyone who loves hi fi knows this. We simply don't have measurements that are accurate enough to predict with reasonable certainty which systems will sound better and more faithful to the original sound.
You can rabbit on all you like, but the entire audio review industry agrees with me. So give it up.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
From the Mpeg audio FAQ
http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/fa...aud/mp1-aud.htm
quote:
What is the Signal-To-Noise Ratio (SNR) of MPEG Audio?
For a perceptual codec, this is not really a relevant question. The SNR is a very bad measure of perceptual audio quality, even for a waveform coder. The SNR measured in a conventional way, may vary from a few dB up to more than 100 dB, mostly depending on the signal, while no noise is audible in any of these cases. Within the International Telecommunication Union (ITU-R), a task group (TG 10/4) is working on the development of a more appropriate objective measurement system, based on perceptual models. For the moment, one has to rely on the human ear as a measuring instrument, i.e. there are no other reliable means to determine the quality of a perceptual codec than listening tests. Even when a standardised perceptually based objective measurement system is available, listening tests will still be wise for comparison of different audio codecs. |
Kiss my ass Asher.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-03-2005 09:13
|
|