Music sales are not affected by web piracy

[hifi]

don't appeal to repetition please, this just got good

[pembroke]

It seems to me like you guys are talking about different things. That's the only way you could possibly sustain a 10 page argument inwhich both sides make valid points and still fail to reach a consensus.

I think that VirtualMark is talking about the sample rates. At 44khz, or really any sample rate, the difference between a WAV and MP3 is the number of binary digits used to describe a second's worth of information. MP3 falls short in that it takes less detailed samples of the audio which results in the "perceived" lower quality so many people talk about. Again at 44hkz, you should have at least 2 samples for each single oscillation up to the highest frequency audible to average human ears (20khz).
It seems that the discussion has shifted from the focus of lower frequencies, but the reason this could lead to loss of low end-clarity/quality is that the samples in mp3 take a less detailed snippet of a much larger picture, so it's like an image being rendered with fewer pixels on a larger CCD. But even there, Mark's point is that these differences are generally inaudible as they generally more present at higher frequencies (and tbh Deadly, I don't know you but I've read some posts of yours in the production forum over the years and it seems like you're safely out of your late teens at least) which I doubt anyone in this thread is still capable of hearing at all, let alone care about losing. So in that sense I guess I'm siding with Mark, I don't exactly see where you guys are coming from, and don't understand why you can't see where he's coming from, so again I presume you're having two different (perhaps related) arguments.


For the record Deadly, On a purely psychoacoustic level, the fact that you knew the formats conditions your receptivity to the sound. It's like listening to trance vs Dubstep. Everyone on here (myself included) is going to think "oh it's trance, it's shitter than the dubstep tune no matter what", but perhaps if we were being played some kind of hybrid with a generally subtle approach to things, and weren't told what it would be, the way we receive it would change.


Apologies for runon sentences and comma-itus.

[VirtualMark]

It seems to me like you guys are talking about different things. That's the only way you could possibly sustain a 10 page argument inwhich both sides make valid points and still fail to reach a consensus.

I think that VirtualMark is talking about the sample rates. At 44khz, or really any sample rate, the difference between a WAV and MP3 is the number of binary digits used to describe a second's worth of information. MP3 falls short in that it takes less detailed samples of the audio which results in the "perceived" lower quality so many people talk about. Again at 44hkz, you should have at least 2 samples for each single oscillation up to the highest frequency audible to average human ears (20khz).
It seems that the discussion has shifted from the focus of lower frequencies, but the reason this could lead to loss of low end-clarity/quality is that the samples in mp3 take a less detailed snippet of a much larger picture, so it's like an image being rendered with fewer pixels on a larger CCD. But even there, Mark's point is that these differences are generally inaudible as they generally more present at higher frequencies (and tbh Deadly, I don't know you but I've read some posts of yours in the production forum over the years and it seems like you're safely out of your late teens at least) which I doubt anyone in this thread is still capable of hearing at all, let alone care about losing. So in that sense I guess I'm siding with Mark, I don't exactly see where you guys are coming from, and don't understand why you can't see where he's coming from, so again I presume you're having two different (perhaps related) arguments.


For the record Deadly, On a purely psychoacoustic level, the fact that you knew the formats conditions your receptivity to the sound. It's like listening to trance vs Dubstep. Everyone on here (myself included) is going to think "oh it's trance, it's shitter than the dubstep tune no matter what", but perhaps if we were being played some kind of hybrid with a generally subtle approach to things, and weren't told what it would be, the way we receive it would change.


Apologies for runon sentences and comma-itus.

Yeah that's pretty much it. Everything I've read points to the fact that people can't tell the difference at 320, although I wouldn't say that's true at 192 or 128kbps. The psychoacoustic model is based on human hearing, and it works.

As to why people would claim to be able to hear a difference in a club environment on a possible mono system, I have no idea. Simply turning up the volume just makes everything louder.

The null test is one of the best that we have for showing what's actually being done to a signal, it basically subtracts one signal from another to leave just the changes. Again, as to why someone would claim that this test is no good is beyond me.

I do realise that I come across a bit condescending at times, but I don't think I'm the only one to blame for this thread escalating. Numerous people have hurled insults, even if I did it first they're just as bad for letting it continue. My initial comment was to tell someone to use their brain when they pointed out that an a/b test wasn't done in a nightclub. I don't think that's too unreasonable, but I understand their point. My suggestion to them would be to do a BLIND a/b test next time they're in such a place and the opportunity arises. Have a friend play the same song in 320mp3 and wav and not tell you which is which.

I may be wrong in some cases - there may be some variation in bass responses, depending on the encoder used and the settings. For example - you can use joint stereo, it's possible that this could affect a bass signal if there was some stereo imaging being lost and the bass was phasing. I've not looked into this before. It would also depend on the sound system and if that's being summed to mono too. But bass generally is the simplest part of the audio spectrum to encode - i've tested settings as low as 64kbps and it can easily reproduce a sine sub. Obviously there's no other info there, but you couldn't do say, an electric guitar at those settings, it'd fall apart.

I do find that electronic music is easier to compress than say rock music, as electronic music tends to have less random harmonics. Again, the electric guitar has very complicated harmonics when compared to a lot of synth patches. Although more modern brostep probably challenges that. But one way encoders work is by picking out patterns, and if there are no patterns due to lots of random harmonics then the sound won't compress as well.

[Terpit]

I just saw people on another forum making fun of you

[VirtualMark]

I just saw people on another forum making fun of you

Cool story.

[syrup]

i play 320s

[VirtualMark]

i play 320s

Have you had any complaints about sound quality?

[Phase Down]

Wow, there is so much misinformation here!

Lossy compression takes out sounds that we can't hear! Unless the scientists who designed it say that their model is no longer valid, then none of you idiots are going to convince me otherwise!

Most people are stupid - they lack critical thinking and just believe the nonsense that is spread around the internet.

As I said - sub bass is very very easy to reproduce!

Deadly Habit - it is you that is the idiot, for getting all of your information from one Sound on Sound opinion article. If you read what it actually says - you'll see that the words "reputation for sounding weak" appear - this proves what I'm saying about myths. If we actually compare the signals and do a null test THERE IS NO LOSS IN BASS YOU FUCKING MORON.

Wub - yes, thanks for stating the obvious. Lossy compression loses information, nobody would dispute that. What I am disputing is that NO HUMAN can tell the difference at 320 unless they have some of the best ears in the world, and an equally high quality sound system. Again - do a null test.

Phigure - again, what part of lossy compression do you think I don't understand? You're just dragging up the same tired points and showing a lack of understanding.

Terpit - no such thing as a limiter? What? I don't understand your point. But you do have an impressive beer gut.

Please, go to university and study some science before running your mouths off about a subject like this. Most of you know next to nothing about this! Sure, I respect some of your musical abilities, but we're discussing scientific fact here, which is purely objective.

wow just wow... virtual mark kill yourself you useless human being

[VirtualMark]

wow just wow... virtual mark kill yourself you useless human being

Lol, another stupid post. I see that you'd rather attack me than come up with an actual argument. You may find this changes once you get through puberty.

[dickman69]

i think mark's been masturbating the entire time he's been responding to posts in this thread

[Phase Down]

wow just wow... virtual mark kill yourself you useless human being

Lol, another stupid post. I see that you'd rather attack me than come up with an actual argument. You may find this changes once you get through puberty.

i have no argument, I just think you are shitty and arrogant
















in all honesty you deserve to live so dont do anything stupid

[VirtualMark]

wow just wow... virtual mark kill yourself you useless human being

Lol, another stupid post. I see that you'd rather attack me than come up with an actual argument. You may find this changes once you get through puberty.

i have no argument, I just think you are shitty and arrogant
















in all honesty you deserve to live so dont do anything stupid

Well thanks for your input. Yes I admit that I could conduct myself in a more adult manner, as could a lot of people in this forum. I find it strange that you choose to single me out and ignore the pages of insults and dumb comments by other people in this thread - have I fallen out with you in the past?

i think mark's been masturbating the entire time he's been responding to posts in this thread

See what I mean? I do find that once an argument advances past someones level of intelligence, they find that they can no longer contribute and start hurling insults instead. Or they know that they are wrong, realise that they're backed into a corner and the primitive defense mechanism kicks in - along come the insults and attempts at mockery.

Although they just make themselves look more stupid to an intelligent person.

The only person who I've argued with here who actually knows his stuff is Deadly Habit. We just differ on a small point - whether or not the psychoacoustic model breaks down at high volumes and whether or not 320 mp3s significantly alter the bass response. The rest of the arguments against me are unsubstantial and irrelevant.

Thanks to the people who have taken the time to read through the thread and understand my point. Clearly there are some people here intelligent enough to do this and not feel the need to twist what I say.

[test_recordings]

I find it funny how digital dub reggae can record lower frequencies yet ones recorded to tape feel and sound heavier...

[VirtualMark]

I find it funny how digital dub reggae can record lower frequencies yet ones recorded to tape feel and sound heavier...

Yeah this argument comes up for vinyl too - usually it's the result of the additional harmonics generated by the medium that give it that "warmer" sound. Digital tends to be transparent, whereas analog adds in some distortion - which a lot of people find pleasing.

[Phase Down]

I can honestly say that I did not see anyone post anything stupid and offensive and even in the end licking their own ass hole apart from yourself, and I would never go with deadly habits side because he post too many damn boring videos around this forum so this was really a one off.


A FUCKING WELL DESERVED ONE THO DONT FORGET THAT



edit: your not as bad as the guy in my sig

[VirtualMark]

I can honestly say that I did not see anyone post anything stupid and offensive and even in the end licking their own ass hole apart from yourself

Really?

Just look above and you'll see:

I just saw people on another forum making fun of you

i think mark's been masturbating the entire time he's been responding to posts in this thread

Monkey see monkey do?
You're such a knob.

WHAT ARE YOU A PSEUDO INTELLECT U KNOW NUFFING I GET STR8 UP FACTS M8 U JUST PUT OUT ANECDOTES NOT LIKE THEY MEAN ANYTHING LET ME GIVE YOU SOME OF MY ANECDOTES BUT THOSE ARE FACTS U DIPSHIT
U REALLY ARE STUPID ARENT U
HEY IM A NICE GUY

condescending "know it-all" dipshit

Etc etc - that was just going back 3 or 4 pages, there's lots more. Unless you've already blocked all of those people, I'm surprised that you didn't notice their insults?

And then there were the people like Wub and Phigure that kept accusing me of saying that lossy compression isn't lossy - which I never said!

[Phase Down]

imo thats more like usual forum trols trying to get the heat out of you, but noone apart from you is going "virtual mark is a fucking idiot, and your fucking stupid, and you should use your fucking brain next time you fucking even think about fucking replying you motherfucker dadfucker"

[Phase Down]

so basically be more gentle troll like with your insults and you will have my seal of approval

[VirtualMark]

imo thats more like usual forum trols trying to get the heat out of you, but noone apart from you is going "virtual mark is a fucking idiot, and your fucking stupid, and you should use your fucking brain next time you fucking even think about fucking replying you motherfucker dadfucker"

VirtualMark is an idiot

I bet you have a tiny penis Mark

u did it mark

uve achieved maximum cunttage

LOL you fucking mong,

No, definitely nobody calling me an idiot or swearing there! Seriously, how anyone can defend this is beyond me.

Come on, you are just taking sides like everyone else. Try to realise that I'm not the only one who hurls insults.

As for stupidity - look at some of the claims I've had to respond to:

only a saw wave would not lose detail b/c u use a bit crusher when u make it

b/c sub is a sine wave its very responsive to changes in the compression like that

What?

If you think about it, there's no such thing as a limiter.

What?

And then I had to deal with people telling me that lossy compression loses data - yet I had already posted that lossy compression loses data. Honestly I'd sometimes rather be dragged through broken glass than deal with this level of idiocy. It's like me saying "trees have green leafs" and someone else coming along and saying "they're green you moron". It gets tedious and I end up being condescending. I could be worse and get personal but I try not to, I'd actually much rather just debate the subject we're arguing about.

[EliteLennon117]

This thread is going no where, Wub please lock this bitch up.