The Gadget Show
- Thread starter steve_1979
- Start date
Infiniteloop
Well-known member
steve_1979 said:
If it's poorly mastered or a victim of the 'Loudness Wars', it really won't matter what format it's in. More than likely it'll sound terrible in all of them.
I saw the last Gadget show when an audio expert and a musician plus a large'ish audience where asked to differentiate between MP3 and lossless. First it was through Headphones then via a high end system.
I can't remember the exact outcome but it was far from clear cut with probably as many guessing wrong as correct.
I've just compared Brubeck's 'Take Five' on Spotify Premium/OggVorbis with my Flac stored version through Headphones. I am pretty sure I can hear the differences, both in Bass and treble. The Flac version sounds very marginally cleaner and better defined with firmer bass and better extended/less brittle highs. However, the differences are minute and I am not sure I could unfailingly point out the differences through my system in a blind test. - I can also understand why some may find one prefereable to the other. The Flac version, whilst more detailed and 'hifi', has somewhat less drive or energy whilst the OggV one seems to have more drive and subjectively a slightly more organic sound (Volume equalization switched off).
To be honest, I could happily just live with the lossy versions but appreciate that to wring out that last tiny amount of information/detail, lossless is still ahead and brings some benefits. The higher resolution your system is capable of, the more this applies probably.
I can't remember the exact outcome but it was far from clear cut with probably as many guessing wrong as correct.
I've just compared Brubeck's 'Take Five' on Spotify Premium/OggVorbis with my Flac stored version through Headphones. I am pretty sure I can hear the differences, both in Bass and treble. The Flac version sounds very marginally cleaner and better defined with firmer bass and better extended/less brittle highs. However, the differences are minute and I am not sure I could unfailingly point out the differences through my system in a blind test. - I can also understand why some may find one prefereable to the other. The Flac version, whilst more detailed and 'hifi', has somewhat less drive or energy whilst the OggV one seems to have more drive and subjectively a slightly more organic sound (Volume equalization switched off).
To be honest, I could happily just live with the lossy versions but appreciate that to wring out that last tiny amount of information/detail, lossless is still ahead and brings some benefits. The higher resolution your system is capable of, the more this applies probably.
Foo Fighters on Spotify Premium on highest setting vs wav files on PC.
Cymbals sound I'll defined and splashy on Spotify. crisp and clear with WAV.
You think bass and drum impact sounds ok on Spotify until you compare with WAV, you can feel the bass and drums go through you, it's sounds faster and deeper.
My kids could clearly hear difference, and I didn't tell them what's playing.
Cymbals sound I'll defined and splashy on Spotify. crisp and clear with WAV.
You think bass and drum impact sounds ok on Spotify until you compare with WAV, you can feel the bass and drums go through you, it's sounds faster and deeper.
My kids could clearly hear difference, and I didn't tell them what's playing.
Infiniteloop
Well-known member
Cynic-al said:
For me with Hi Res, it's all about the 'atmosphere' around the notes and the realism and texture of the individual sounds that make up the music. It all goes to making the music more three-dimensional like it would be when live. The higher the Res, the more of this you get.
emperor's new clothes
Well-known member
Going to hear the difference using a 50p smart phone dac and cheapo earbuds? Nope. Usual dumbed-down carp from the gadget show. As my dad used to say: You don't buy a racehorse and then feed it doughnuts.
tino
Well-known member
I managed to guess right (which file was the FLAC file) listening through PC speakers!
The poll reveals 50% guessed right too ...
The poll reveals 50% guessed right too ...
Native_bon
Well-known member
Have you actually watched the particular show in question? They used top of the range Hifi system. Unless your saying all the people in the listening room are tune deaf.emperor's new clothes said:
bigboss
Moderator
tino said:
SoundCloud converts all uploads to 128kbps MP3 format.
http://www.whathifi.com/forum/mp3mp4/gadget-show-mp3-test-did-you-see-it
Interesting. Maybe that doesn't apply to downloads. Only streaming. I've got downloads from souncloud at much higher bit rates.
bigboss
Moderator
ID. said:
Yes, this is what SoundCloud says:
Sometimes our transcoding system can create audio artifacts, as we transcode all tracks to 128 kbps mp3 for streaming playback.
We recommend uploading a lossless or high-quality lossy file to reduce these artifacts to a minimum, but unfortunately there's not much we can do for the handful of individual tracks that are still affected.
As a workaround, you can make your track downloadable. This allows your listeners to download your track in the exact format that you uploaded, without any transcoding.
http://help.soundcloud.com/customer/en/portal/articles/94796-i-just-uploaded-and-my-track-is-distorted-
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram