garym wrote: > A good high bitrate lossy file should be transparent to the listener > (for most music...i.e., not "problem samples", etc.). Perhaps the 16 vs > 24 files you are comparing are from different masters while the 16 bit > vs 320kbs lossy are from the same master. The 24/44.1 tracks you refer > to....were they based on the original CDs, some later remasters, the > stereo box set, the mono box set, etc.? Before doing any testing, I'd > make sure that I'm comparing apples to apples (no pun intended) with > regard to the underlying track.
The high-rez Beatles tracks (the 24 bit/44.1 khz) were obtained from the 2009 Apple USB dongle (sold in the shape of an apple). So these are, I'm assuming, legit, no? The 16 bit/44.1 khz tracks where ripped from the 2009 stereo box set in the AIFF format. The 320 kbps lossy mp3s were obtained from the same Apple USB dongle. I'd think all these formats are legit, and we're here indeed comparing apples to apples. But please correct me if I'm being delusional here. Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ heisenberg's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59622 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98591 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
