Amazon MP3 downloads

[ID.]

One interesting thing I've come across is people preferring a lower resolution file. To these people the information stripped out makes the main parts stand out more. Like having better separation and clarity allowing them to better hear the individual instruments.

not saying that this is what has happened here, but it was something I found when I first started using ripped files and experimenting a bit.

i found the same i listened intently to the mp3 and that was my conclusion too..seemed to accent the important part of the mahler movement..on the cd it painted a broader picture..both worked strangely! So my estimation of the much maligned mp3 went up a lot! As it did with cds when i got much better pre amp! Very good post by op..it poses some interesting questions on how we hear..and whats better or just different!

One other impression I had from experimenting at that time was that the compression algorithm seemed to work better for real instruments than it did for a lot of the electronic music I listened to at the time.

 

[hybridauth_Google_112658120703314018098]

This is an interesting test if you have 2 minutes. Can you tell the difference between the same piece of music recorded in 8 bit vs 16 bit resolution?

http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit.php

16 bit gives significantly more dynamic range than 8 bit, but personally, I scored 5/10 - i.e. totally random. Be honest

 

[TrevC]

the remastering on some of the beatles cds are great!

I agree. The remastering of the Beatles songs is one of the few cases where it was done right and the new versions actually sound better than the originals rather than just being louder and more compessed.

I can think of a couple of remastered versions that sound better. Genesis - Foxtrot and Steely Dan - Countdown to Ecstasy.

Don't like the other Genesis albums as much , they tend to have mixed the vocals too high.

 

[keeper of the quays]

the remastering on some of the beatles cds are great!

I agree. The remastering of the Beatles songs is one of the few cases where it was done right and the new versions actually sound better than the originals rather than just being louder and more compessed.

I can think of a couple of remastered versions that sound better. Genesis - Foxtrot and Steely Dan - Countdown to Ecstasy.

Don't like the other Genesis albums as much , they tend to have mixed the vocals too high. 

i agree..i have a three cd compilation of genesis..i dont much care for it apart from the carpet crawlers..great song..still great even with dodgy mastering!

 

[tonky]

Great track

Can there be anything better than The Musical Box tho! PG at his very best!

tonky

 

[paulkebab]

Mothership is a collection of tracks remastered by yours truly Jimmy Page. I have everything Zeppelin did on CD DVD and the wonderful Celebration Day on BD and here's my findings on Steve's very good point. Everything on Mothership is clearer and cleaner BUT the midrange is definitely pointed UP. In direct comparison to the original non-remastered CD's I find every track slightly warmer and more forgiving to my ears. This is over my speakers and both pairs of headphones, whether from CD or the original ripped WAV's on my hard drive. Now I haven't got the dynamic range software but it does seem that Jimmy has moved everything up a little on the scale too. It all makes for something not entirely agreeable with and I usually head for the ripped originals. Maybe the mp3 versions also have this appeal in the way they sound? I also bought a 10cc remastered CD a while ago and whoever supposedly did the remastering needs a serious looking at. Lesson learned, I will never buy a remastered version of anything again if I can help it. When I have some time I will remix the remasters I have into something more enjoyable. While we're on Genesis I find Trick of the Tail (original) one of the best CD's ever in terms of mix/engineering.

 

[steve_1979]

Mothership is a collection of tracks remastered by yours truly Jimmy Page. I have everything Zeppelin did on CD DVD and the wonderful Celebration Day on BD and here's my findings on Steve's very good point. Everything on Mothership is clearer and cleaner BUT the midrange is definitely pointed UP. In direct comparison to the original non-remastered CD's I find every track slightly warmer and more forgiving to my ears. This is over my speakers and both pairs of headphones, whether from CD or the original ripped WAV's on my hard drive. Now I haven't got the dynamic range software but it does seem that Jimmy has moved everything up a little on the scale too. It all makes for something not entirely agreeable with and I usually head for the ripped originals. Maybe the mp3 versions also have this appeal in the way they sound? I also bought a 10cc remastered CD a while ago and whoever supposedly did the remastering needs a serious looking at. Lesson learned, I will never buy a remastered version of anything again if I can help it. When I have some time I will remix the remasters I have into something more enjoyable. While we're on Genesis I find Trick of the Tail (original) one of the best CD's ever in terms of mix/engineering.

That's interesting and is similar to what I hear when comparing the CD to the MP3 download. I suspect that the MP3 tracks are from the original master versions.

Out of interest do the remastered Mothership versions sound noticably louder than the originals on your system?

 

[steve_1979]

I posted a comment on the AVI forum about Amazon's Mothership MP3 download and someone posted this reply which is interesting:

"Your post has prompted me to check out the 2015 remaster of Mothership and to my surprise this one I can[/b] listen to without having to switch off midway as I had to do with 2007 version which apparently fell victim to the loudness war."

 

[steve_1979]

I posted a comment on the AVI forum about Amazon's Mothership MP3 download and someone posted this reply which is interesting:

"Your post has prompted me to check out the 2015 remaster of Mothership and to my surprise this one I can[/b] listen to without having to switch off midway as I had to do with 2007 version which apparently fell victim to the loudness war."

 

[paulkebab]

If its a loudness victim or the mid is just too far up. A remaster of a remaster? My god it's getting ridiculous no wonder torrent sites have so much traffic. It's definitely disappointing for the consumer in every way and a ripoff.

 

[steve_1979]

........ *ROFL*

As usual you seem to have totally missed the point. This is nothing to do with the bit-rates or file type used.

The version that they use for their MP3's sometimes comes from a source that is better mastered than the CD version.

This isn't saying that a compressed MP3 is a better format than a lossless CD rip. It's saying that they both come from a different source and the source that is used to make the MP3 has better sound quality than the source that is used to make the CD.