2 Apr
2013
2 Apr
'13
11:07 a.m.
On 04/02/2013 09:31 AM, Peder Hedlund wrote:
...
Over at HydrogenAudio they have a rule that you
aren't allowed to talk
about hearing differences between audio files unless you can prove it in
an ABX test.
You really should try doing one and check if you *really* can hear the
difference between the original wav and an mp3 produced by, say, "lame
-V4" ( which would be ~160kbps) or if it's just your mind fooling you
into thinking you can. Never underestimate the power of belief :)
Are you basically saying that it's no need for lossless formats? ;-)
All respect for HydrogenAudio, but I can't think about other's rules
when I just have to make a MP3 file without esses or tones that's
missing, then I just have to do the mix better and somehow compensate a
little bit. MP3 artifacts and some quality loss are well known issues
and should not create to much debate. I already use LAME through
Audacity, I don't need help on that and take anybody's word for it when
they say that this is the best encoder. Then it's only one thing left: I
need to improve my mixes, and as I've said earlier elsewhere: I have no
problem dealing with that. And believe me: I know very well that you
can't always trust your ears and that everything will sound the same
every time. :-)
Jostein