On 28/04/2014 19:37, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"gremlin_95" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2014 13:14, John Williamson wrote:
On 28/04/2014 09:59, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2014 01:40:04 +0100, Johny B Good wrote:

I regard not only CD as pre-historic but DVD and Blu-Ray[1] too. It's
not that that makes me feel old, just the effects of old age creeping
up on me.

Presumably old age is having its normal affect on hearing and sight
so you don't notice how crap downloads and/or streaming are compared
to CD or Blu-Ray (or even DVD come to that). B-)

What worries *me* is that many teenagers are of the opinion that
downloads are better quality than CDs.

Even at my age, I can tell the difference, even on earbuds and small
screens.


There must be something wrong with me then because I can't really tell the
difference

Ditto - originally I thought MP3's were inferior [to CD] because they were
not lossless compression (like zip), however for most purposes you really
can't hear the difference.

Do the same experiment that I did with some colleagues.

Record a band they know well. (I used a band from Stoke called Halcyon
Dayz, most of whose members worked at the same place we did.)

Mix the close mic'd multitrack recording to your taste.

Play back the stereo mix at 16 bit, 44.1kHz sample rate.

Repeat using a 320kHz bitrate mo3 file using the same playback system.

Repeat using "FM radio" quality settings of 128kHz bitrate.

Almost anyone will note a deterioration in sound quality the further
down the chain you go.

Repeat using a decent choir and a crossed cardioid mic setup. Play to
the choirmaster.

Find exactly the same results.

I use a lot of mp3 files to play background music while I'm driving, as
I can't justify the storage cost for CD quality .wav files with many
horsepower of diesel engine drowning out the distortion and noise floor.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.