Bit rates over 192 are a waste of hard drive space

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by Séguin

Well at least some of you arn't stupid.

Everyone who said they can tell the difference between 192 and 320 is lying to themselfs.

Seriously, stfu already, you're a noob.

My fuckin' dog can tell the difference.

[kir mokum]

of course your dog can tell the difference.

[dabbler]

Originally Posted by Séguin

Well at least some of you arn't stupid.

Everyone who said they can tell the difference between 192 and 320 is lying to themselfs.

anyone who can't is deaf

[P.A.R.T.Y]

MP3's suck, but 320 Khz is gonna sound phenomenally better than 192 Khz. Go vinyl!!

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by Séguin

Well at least some of you arn't stupid.

Everyone who said they can tell the difference between 192 and 320 is lying to themselfs.

Well at least I can spell "aren't" and "themselves".

Guess I'm not as stupid as some.

PS: Just because you can't hear the difference doesn't mean others can't either. I have taken tests to compare them and I've come out being able to tell the difference, so try again.

[Séguin]

Dave: Seriously. You don't know what your talking about. Go read a science book.
PS: Picking on my spelling is a weak way to change the topic.

Number guy: Yes, because your dog can hear higher frequencies than a human ear.

I challenge both of you to take this test. Seriously, PM me and I'll set it up guys. If you score 80% then you can say whatever you want.

[tiedye]

Including dirty things about your mother?

[Séguin]

Originally Posted by tiedye

Including dirty things about your mother?

Already been done... on FM radio might I add :p

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by Séguin

Dave: Seriously. You don't know what your talking about. Go read a science book.

Read plenty, thanks. Spent two years doing Psychology too, which studies a lot of human perception (including the organs involved in creating those perceptions). Enough to know that making statements about the human body in absolutes has managed to eventually discredit just about every scientist whose made them. An average is merely that - an average. And just reading high school science texts will only tell you that much. Reading actual scientific journals will teach you that there are exceptions to just about every rule - Including auditory range.

Though I find it amusing that you're claiming the science venue when a professional audio engineer already shot down your little theory there (hey shift!).

PS: Picking on my spelling is a weak way to change the topic.

Just pointing out the irony about you making remarks about intelligence is all.

[Séguin]

So your not going to take the challenge?

[ebbomega]

So tracks of whose choosing?

Or is this gonna be one of those single-blind situations?

[Séguin]

one of your choice. one of my choice.

[Royal_Phunk]

I find the 192 to 320 quite a difference. for the mp3 codec the songs frequencies are compared to psychoacoustic models of human hearing as i think someone already mentioned, the frequencies that are deemed to be higher/lower than we can percieve according to the model are removed shrinking the size of the file but keeping the core of the song. imo the well recorded 320khz has a lot more spatial quality to it then anything lower.

[tiedye]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

Just pointing out the irony about you making remarks about intelligence is all.

How is that ironic? Spelling and grammar are a matter of education, not intelligence.

[dabbler]

I can prove it's possible without a blind test....

Here is the frequency analysis of Mary J Blige "Sweet Thing" in 320 first, and then 192. Since the Human ear is capable of hearing 20-20,000 Hz, then it's obvious that these differences COULD be heard by the human ear. Maybe not someone who has been exposed to loud music for many years, but a 10 year old would DEFINITELY hear the difference.

[dabbler]

and just for the record, here is the PCM audio...

[Séguin]

A kid could hear it possibly. Not any of us... I did agree to that earlier in this thread.

[dabbler]

you know, I've already proved you wrong, you just won't admit it. so....

don't bother taking this test yourself, as you've already made it clear you can't hear anything over 13,000 or something..

I want everyone else to take this test and post what frequencies they CAN hear. then maybe you will shut up.


Buy Mosquito Ringtone

For the record, I can hear 17,000 which is within the frequency range affected by 192 compression. and I KNOW there are people who will post back results of higher numbers

[dj_soo]

Yea, I can hear the mosquito ring tone too... it's actually strange to me that some people can't. None of my co-workers can hear it - so one of them just keeps playing it all the time to drive me nuts :P

[dabbler]

and I thought you had tinnitus!? so you can hear 20,000 eh.... hmmm I guess that proves that people CAN hear the difference on a 192.

[dj_soo]

i have the occasional ringing, but it's been better ever since I've made it a habit of wearing earplugs to every show i go to.

I now just need to learn how to DJ with those things in...

[mapleleaf4ever]

I got 16kHz... to be expected though. 5 years of aircraft engines and not being so dilligent with my hearing protection did catch up somewhat.

Cool test though!

[DefJef]

Originally Posted by dabbler

For the record, I can hear 17,000 which is within the frequency range affected by 192 compression. and I KNOW there are people who will post back results of higher numbers

I could hear at least 17,000 also, but as I went higher I couldn't tell if I was hearing actual frequency, or just electrical noise from my cans/laptop.

Ive been kept awake by a mosquito in my room before, so Ill assume I can hear it!

[dj_soo]

Originally Posted by dabbler

and I thought you had tinnitus!? so you can hear 20,000 eh.... hmmm I guess that proves that people CAN hear the difference on a 192.

oh, actually i can hear up to 19000 (if i concentrate. Past 20,000 and i can't).

[Wood]

i could hear up to 17000 with the TV & bathroom fan on... i couldn't hear 18000 so got up & turned that stuff off - on y way back to the computer i noticed i could hear it better about 8-9 feet away from the speaker, then i kind of lost it on the way back. i thought i could hear up to 20000 when i stepped a few feet back but it was hard to tell as there's still a fair bit of background noise coming from outside my apartment.

Regardless... i would not say 320 kbps is a waste of space if you're using the files for DJing on club sound. Even if most people can't tell the difference, you owe it to the ones that can. i seriously don't understand DJs who cheap out on quality to save a little HD space, they should be locked in their bedrooms for eternity.