|
KillHour posted:The checksums will come out different because they are two different encoding schemes. Just like how a zip and a rar will have different checksums, even with the same contents. Yeah but I swear there's some kind of checksum that looks at the uncompressed raw bits instead. I'm not crazy, let me try to find it. Edit: so yeah ffmpeg will do it, but it converts the input file to WAV on the fly first. So anyway, my point still stands if you try converting your aiff and alac files to wav and doing an md5 checksum. They will be identical. BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Oct 15, 2014 |
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:No I mean I believe you I'm just pissed that "expert" misinformed me when I asked him a direct question about media I paid for. Never believe someone on the internet without doing the research yourself. That's what drives someone to believe self-proclaimed "experts" that don't know jack poo poo.  While we're on the subject of challenging your preconceptions, I strongly recommend you give this a try: http://lifehacker.com/5903625/mp3-or-lossless-see-if-you-can-hear-the-difference-with-this-test Since you have a bunch of lossless files already, you can get your comparison tracks easily by converting to AAC or MP3 in iTunes or whatever program you prefer. If you do MP3, use V0. Pick songs you know like the back of your hand. Ones you are sure you could ABX from memory with a head cold at 3 in the morning. Do each song at least 10 times to make sure you're not just getting lucky. I think you'll be surprised just how hard it is to tell them apart. Maybe you can (I sure as hell can't, and my setup is no slouch), but it will take all your concentration - far more than you would ever use actually listening to music. You have to know what weaknesses the specific format has, and you have to look for them. This is not to say that lossless formats aren't useful; they're extremely important for archiving (and if you're ripping a CD collection, you should be using a lossless format if you can spare the HDD space). But they were never intended for listening to directly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Goons, let's talk Dolby Atmos. Will you be upgrading? Since everything is backwards compatible, pending your source, of course, do you think its worth it? I've got a pretty mediocre HT that needs upgrading, Mitsu HD1k projector, Yamaha RXV467 amp, various speakers, etc. Is DTS going to be coming out with something competitive soon? Is it worth waiting to upgrade to see if all of this is going to pan out? I'm pretty well-versed, otherwise. I'm just excited, if skeptical if this is going to take off or be a flop ala 3D.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Atmos looks sweet but it seems like a half step to me since it just adds "sound objects" to the existing "flat" surround format. A true [IMO] next-generation system would be 100% sound objects and adapt itself to your setup. As it is for home atmos unless you got lucky with your previous purchases it's not really going to match up sonically anyway, especially those upward-firing "bounce" speakers. That said if I was building a system from scratch and had a dedicated room I'd probably do it but I think most people would do better just buying better amps, speakers and/or subs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:Thanks man. HDTracks are well known for selling stuff from crap masters too. They're about as trustworthy as a Russian MP3 site and everything they tell you with a grain of salt. They exist to separate people from their money and nothing more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:HDTracks are well known for selling stuff from crap masters too. They're about as trustworthy as a Russian MP3 site and everything they tell you with a grain of salt. They exist to separate people from their money and nothing more. Since I've never gone there, I decided to check their FAQ to see how long it took to set off red flags. Their first answer is how to use the files they sell, so that doesn't count. Their second answer has a typo and their third answer has blatantly misleading information. Their fourth answer makes a comparison that isn't even close to accurate. Edit: Just for fun, let's pick this apart. quote:For comparison, our 88.1kHz/24-bit FLAC files gives you profoundly more musical information, twice the amount found on a CD. Think of the CD playing music vs.88.1kHz/24-bit FLAC files as similar to the difference between watching a VHS video tape vs. watching a DVD on your HDTV. Both VHS and DVD video are lossy compressed formats. All consumer video formats are lossy. VHS is an analog NTSC format, while DVD is a digital format. Both have the same vertical resolution (480), but VHS is interlaced (each frame shows only even or odd horizontal lines) while DVD is progressive (all lines in all frames). Also, DVD has a much higher horizontal resolution. Comparing any of that to audio is a load of crock. quote:For another comparison, 176.4kHz/24-bit FLAC files would be comparable to watching Blu-Ray video on your HDTV The DVD on an HDTV is going to look a lot better than a VHS tape, and a Blu-Ray is going to look even better! The ONLY difference between 88.1kHz and 176.4kHz audio files is the maximum frequency that can be reproduced. 88.1 kHz can perfectly reproduce audio up to 44kHz (max human hearing range is ~20kHz). 176.4kHz can reproduce audio up to 88kHz. Dogs can only hear up to about 60kHz, so I guess if you want an audio file that can record dog whistles in all their glory, this is what you want. Also, remember Blu-Rays still use a lossy compression format - H.264. Here's an example. Say you have a 1080p Blu-Ray (1920x1080 resolution). Do you know what the resolution of the chroma (color information) is? 960x540. Seriously. They throw out 75% of the color information in a frame, and you probably never noticed. Double Edit: Uncompressed 8 bit per channel 1080p video at 29.97 FPS (NTSC standard) would take up over 11GB per minute. There's a reason you never hear about people using lossless encoding for video. KillHour fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Oct 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
Stereophile reviews a setup at a high-end audio show where the cost of the power cables alone is more than double that of the main speakers: http://www.stereophile.com/content/rmaf-2014-another-class-entirely
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
strtj posted:Stereophile reviews a setup at a high-end audio show where the cost of the power cables alone is more than double that of the main speakers: Aww, it can't be that... quote:Cables: Transparent, Nordost 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
grack posted:Aww, it can't be that... And there are absolutely $100K+ speakers out there, but this system: Loudspeakers: Wilson Audio Sasha II ($30,900/pair) 2 x Wilson Watchdog subs ($9800/each) 2 x Wilson Controller ($4000/each)
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Loudspeakers: $58,500 Analog: $37,995 Digital: $74,998 Electronics: $104,000 Things that actually make a difference: $275,493 Racks: $45,710 Cables: $227,280 Things that don't make a difference: $272,990 Yup, he spent almost as much on cables and racks as on audio gear.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Loudspeakers: $58,500 Well to be fair, it's a trade show so nobody's spending money on anything. They're hoping to sell this junk.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
Over $15000 per individual speaker cable, and here I am from time to time wondering if I should really spend a few bucks a piece on Neutrik connectors instead of cheap stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 06:45
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Over $15000 per individual speaker cable, and here I am from time to time wondering if I should really spend a few bucks a piece on Neutrik connectors instead of cheap stuff. Do you connect and disconnect your speakers all the time? Do you set up your speakers in a place where they are likely to be jostled a lot? If you said no to both of these questions, you do not need a Neutrik connector.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 11:33
|
|
|
strtj posted:Do you connect and disconnect your speakers all the time? Do you set up your speakers in a place where they are likely to be jostled a lot? If you said no to both of these questions, you do not need a Neutrik connector. Neutrik doesn't just make SpeakOn connectors, they make high-quality connectors for pretty much everything audio/video.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 11:44
|
|
|
strtj posted:Stereophile reviews a setup at a high-end audio show where the cost of the power cables alone is more than double that of the main speakers: I'm the acoustic marble and ficus treatment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
Neutrik make really good poo poo and in the grand scheme of things audio related, are really loving cheap. I'm also a fan of Amphenol stuff. I think every cable I've ever bought/made in the past 10 years or so probably wouldn't even come to $1500. And I say this as someone who builds PA kits and racks as a hobby. Olympic Mathlete fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Loudspeakers: $58,500 Remember that we're dealing with an auditory system that can be confused pretty quickly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knQSRTApNcs
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
^^ Depends what's under 'electronics' but considering you can buy a Behringer DCX2496 and an appropriate measurement mic to RTA your room and EQ everything flat for not too much cash it's fair to say that most of that lot is total bollocks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Uh, how much of these 275K$ actually make a difference to a system under say 7.5K$ (to be generous)? I attended RMAF this year and sat in this room. I was bored stupid. Wilson has the most "audiophile" sound of any room there every year. Extremely low distortion but boring as all get out, in large part because Peter McGrath (Wilson's director of sales) has terrible taste in music.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
TheMadMilkman posted:I attended RMAF this year and sat in this room. I was bored stupid. Wilson has the most "audiophile" sound of any room there every year. Extremely low distortion but boring as all get out, in large part because Peter McGrath (Wilson's director of sales) has terrible taste in music. I gather you can't ask them to put on your own music unless you're John Atkinson?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
After i win the lottery i'll start buying audiophile systems for 100k only if they accurately reproduce the fine crackle of my 1995 64kbps SoAD mp3s and can recreate the warm sound and intense range of Skrillex remixing Ke$ha feat Justin Bieber. If it gives one of those frauds a stroke would it be considered the perfect murder?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
In my experience, no. They will only play requested tracks for reviewers and known customers with deep pockets. There are a handful of companies that do this at the shows. It's a huge disservice and insult to the attendees.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
88h88 posted:Neutrik make really good poo poo and in the grand scheme of things audio related, are really loving cheap. I'm also a fan of Amphenol stuff. Fair enough, I'm an Amphenol fan too and Kozmonaut makes a good point, I was just thinking about speakon connectors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
RoadCrewWorker posted:After i win the lottery i'll start buying audiophile systems for 100k only if they accurately reproduce the fine crackle of my 1995 64kbps SoAD mp3s and can recreate the warm sound and intense range of Skrillex remixing Ke$ha feat Justin Bieber. I really, really want to troll high end audio dealers by very seriously asking to hear specific high dollar setups and then giving them a cassette tape to play.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
strtj posted:I really, really want to troll high end audio dealers by very seriously asking to hear specific high dollar setups and then giving them a cassette tape to play. The funny thing about this is that since tapes are analog, they automatically get higher respect than MP3s among a large swath of audiophiles. Never mind the fact that cassette tapes have no more than 6 or 7 bits worth of "resolution" in them on a good day, utilizing the best playback equipment. If you actually tried to carry out this troll, there's a good chance the dealer wouldn't even bat an eye.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:The funny thing about this is that since tapes are analog, they automatically get higher respect than MP3s among a large swath of audiophiles. Never mind the fact that cassette tapes have no more than 6 or 7 bits worth of "resolution" in them on a good day, utilizing the best playback equipment. If you actually tried to carry out this troll, there's a good chance the dealer wouldn't even bat an eye. Surfin' Bird or GTFO
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:The funny thing about this is that since tapes are analog, they automatically get higher respect than MP3s among a large swath of audiophiles. Never mind the fact that cassette tapes have no more than 6 or 7 bits worth of "resolution" in them on a good day, utilizing the best playback equipment. If you actually tried to carry out this troll, there's a good chance the dealer wouldn't even bat an eye. If they get the impression that you are ready and able to spend $100k, they will happily tell you all about how warm and detailed the sound of your speak'n'spell will be or whatever else they think will help empty your pockets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
I'm going to show up with a pair of Beats headphones but act just like everybody else and talk about how those B&W Nautilus speakers really widen the soundstage or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:The funny thing about this is that since tapes are analog, they automatically get higher respect than MP3s among a large swath of audiophiles. Never mind the fact that cassette tapes have no more than 6 or 7 bits worth of "resolution" in them on a good day, utilizing the best playback equipment. If you actually tried to carry out this troll, there's a good chance the dealer wouldn't even bat an eye. This is way too funny to me. I do a lot of work with cassette tape people but no one's pretending that any of this is high quality, it's just cheap. These folks would put out a record in a heartbeat if they had the money. Do high-end audio stores really have a cassette deck on hand?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
I don't know about modern equipment, but I come across a lot of people who swear by equipment made in the 80s
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I don't know about modern equipment, but I come across a lot of people who swear by equipment made in the 80s Jesus, the 80s stuff is such plastic cost-cutting garbage. Even the high-end stuff from the major names is pretty universally terrible, especially compared to the 70s offerings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
taqueso posted:If they get the impression that you are ready and able to spend $100k, they will happily tell you all about how warm and detailed the sound of your speak'n'spell will be or whatever else they think will help empty your pockets. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 07:08
|
|
|
strtj posted:Do you connect and disconnect your speakers all the time? Do you set up your speakers in a place where they are likely to be jostled a lot? If you said no to both of these questions, you do not need a Neutrik connector. I also save a bit by getting their REAN brand connectors whenever p, as far as I can tell they're exactly the same as the Neutrik brand ones but nickel plated instead of powder coated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:I also save a bit by getting their REAN brand connectors whenever p, as far as I can tell they're exactly the same as the Neutrik brand ones but nickel plated instead of powder coated. Enjoy your collapsed soundstage and lack of prat then. Also reduced sense of air and presence. And inability to hear each individual violin in the strings section. I think, though, that if you add some cable elevators you might offset the horrible misuse of nickel plating in place of the sonically superior powder coat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
TheMadMilkman posted:Enjoy your collapsed soundstage and lack of prat then. Also reduced sense of air and presence. And inability to hear each individual violin in the strings section.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
I joined a danish hi-fi debate group on facebook, and it's really hilarious when they get into cable debates. luckily it seems they're mostly levelheaded about it and when ABX tests get mentioned, it's not shouted down immediately. One guy did drama himself out of the group and said he was going back to hifi4all.dk which is notorious for their... views.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Frobbe posted:I joined a danish hi-fi debate group on facebook, and it's really hilarious when they get into cable debates. luckily it seems they're mostly levelheaded about it and when ABX tests get mentioned, it's not shouted down immediately. I'm permabanned from hifi4all.dk, for calling bullshit on their fancy power cables and fuses. This also involved the owner/admin (Mikkel Gige) writing some extremely condescending mails to me, where he states his heartfelt hope that I receive help soon for my "mental issues"  I tried participating at the nerds.dk forums after that (as they have a known dislike of hifi4all.dk), but they're just as bad with the voodoo bullshit once you scratch the surface. It's not worth it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXCHJWCcV90
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
I was waiting for the big reveal when he lifts the sheet and it's coming from an iPod classic playing through one of those Jawbone speakers via a third-party Bluetooth dongle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:26 |
|
|
What's the point of this? Recorded on video with probably "sub-par" microphones and compressed to gently caress with the satanic AAC codec?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 12:23
|
|