m1abrams;279579 Wrote: > However the one thing you said he said was that mp3 was inferior and > that he never stated.
Did you read the article?? John Atkinson Wrote: > > The reason is simple: Although they are universally described in the > mainstream press as being of "CD quality," MP3s and their > lossy-compressed ilk *do not offer sufficient audio quality* for > serious music listening. > ... > But lossy files achieve their conveniently small size by *discarding > too much of the music to be worth considering*. > ... > Yes, this kind of signal is very much a worst case, but this result is > *-not- "CD quality."* > ... > Both MP3 and AAC introduce fairly large changes in the measured > spectra, even at the highest rate of 320kbps. There seems little point > in spending large sums of money on superbly specified audio equipment > if you are going to play *sonically compromised*, lossy-compressed > music on it. > (my bold). And by the way: JA Wrote: > > The degree of this degradation depends on the data rate. Less bits > always equals less music. This is false, period. He really doesn't know what he's talking about. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=44532 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
