From: Jon Glass (jonglass_at_usa.net)
Date: Tue Feb 17 2004 - 22:22:54 PST
on 2/17/04 5:14 PM, mark at mark_at_imap-partners.net wrote:
> IOW CD was playing catchup. Of course, some of the hifi big guns saw the
> writing on the wall and started working on CD players so that today high
> quality is available and affordable in both CD players and CDs.
>
> In retrospect, CDs were forced onto the market long before the technology had
> matured to the extent that it could replace LP in the sound quality stakes,
> but I guess they had to start somewhere.
I think that one of the problems was that the fine art of mastering for CD
had not matured... People knew how to master for LP (and cassettes never
really mattered -- their noise and s/n ratio aren't so hot) but the
implications that a CD is flat across its range, and then, drops like a
cliff took a while to sink in... This was probably the primary reason for
the "harsh" or "bright" sound that people complained about, and why
listening to CDs at the beginning was rather fatiguing... Eventually changes
were made to the players, and mastering improved to improve this quality...
>> Anyhow, I would venture to say, that the average person can not
>> tell the difference between a CD version and a quality MP3
>> recording of a song when played through the same system.
>
> Quality MP3 ?
>
> Anyway, the "obviousness" of this difference depends on the system. A
> half-decent one will easily show it up. Its much less noticable with AAC at
> e.g. 192 kbps and probably also with AAC 128 (though I haven't tried it) which
> is what the ITMS serves up. Right ?
AAC 128, yes, sounds right... :-) There is an interview in a recent
MacAddict, with some DJ or something. In fact, it might even be on the Disc,
or even in the "Music" section of their little app that's on the disc, but
in any case, the DJ says that MP3 may sound fine on an average stereo, or on
your computer, but when you blow it up to club size, it sounds horrible...
That would make sense... Kind of like a digital photo. A 2 mp photo may look
good on a 4x6 inch print, but blow it up to poster size, and all the lack of
data is horribly evident. Same with digital music. Blow it up with wattage
:-) and you can hear what the MP3 took out, that isn't very audible at lower
levels, on smaller speakers.... In my situation, with the tiny speakers and
tiny room in which I listen, I find MP3 acceptable, but I still like to put
my CDs in on occasion, just to hear the original sound. :-)
Hmmm. I just thought of something. This thread seems to reoccur a lot
also... Oh, You know, I have no problems with the sound of mono MP3s on my
Newton!!! They sound fantastic!!!! I suppose that would be like listening to
a contact print? ;-) (there, on topic....)
-- -Jon Glass Krakow, Poland <jonglass_at_usa.net> "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --John Adams -- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 18 2004 - 01:00:02 PST