Wombat wrote: 
> Over the years i was in contact with several persons on the internet and
> exchanged samples of typical faults of mp3 coding. There was only one
> person i know that heard all defects possible. Me for example found some
> sandpaper or chirping noise many people simply missed while me never was
> good at abxing transients. He heard everything, always and offered the
> best qualifying ratings about the lossy codecs he listened i saw. I
> didn't see him posting but lately on a french forum. Guess what? He is
> not convinced of high bits or high samplerates at all. In short, that
> leaves the chance i will ever see something convincing me pretty
> unlikely :)

Good point. And the point I was hinting at is that the current "hi-res"
download services are a great big double blind test. How many golden
ears have actually reported cases of upsampling or "fake hi-res" based
on actually hearing a difference (as opposed to "Audacity Cowboys"
detecting the upsampling by analysis)?



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105413

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to