Dubstepforum.com

How about m4a, which is heading towards the standard format of the "future"

I haven't noticed much of a difference between m4a and mp3, but I'm a home listener...listening to music on less than ideal sound systems.

Who can explain the quality issues as far as m4a goes?

Cosmic Surgeon wrote:

Paulie wrote:Probably more to do with them being used to hearing music on phones etc.

Aaah, the life affirming sound of tinny "bassline" tracks complemented by a roaring bus engine.

Hahah! So true. But I think if you listen to a set on your MDR-v700 headphones you get a pretty darn good experience... obviously there's no substitute for live, but it's still pretty sweet.

your mum wrote:apparently some tests found kids these days prefer the sound of shitty mp3s to lossless formats or whatever

kids these days are fucking idiots

i blame lack of quality childrens television

Aha, i know exactly what you mean, i'm 16 and vinyl has always been my favorite format.

I'm just one of the rare ones :B

Claw's mom is better quality than vinyl.

Reptilian wrote:a 320 mp3 sounds shitter than a cd

i can understand arguing about cd vs. vinyl but 320 vs. vinyl? no contest in a million years

well CD can handle only 128k so ya better off with 320 burned with cd architect.
personally i use vestax cdx 05 with my old skool ec444 echo chamber and 320 sounds amazin through my subs
it is personal taste but i been usin vinyl for 16 years and digital sound is an evolution, i love evolvin new so for me 320

fleischhacker wrote:

Reptilian wrote:a 320 mp3 sounds shitter than a cd

i can understand arguing about cd vs. vinyl but 320 vs. vinyl? no contest in a million years

well CD can handle only 128k so ya better off with 320 burned with cd architect.
personally i use vestax cdx 05 with my old skool ec444 echo chamber and 320 sounds amazin through my subs
it is personal taste but i been usin vinyl for 16 years and digital sound is an evolution, i love evolvin new so for me 320

wrong and don't even wanna break down the technical specs of why

Its simple if you care about the sound quality you use vinyl. Why are people so bothered about having to carry a bag of records these days? Yeah they are heavy,but so what? Peeps are just plain lazy these days

Does anyone here actually think anyone in the audience will say, "That motherfucker's playing a digital track! ASSHOLE!"

Get a life and STFU. In a club you never know the difference. On a professional mix CD only 1337 dickheads will care.

I think vinyl sounds better, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be an ignorant fuck and refuse to play digital files.

THE CROWD DOESN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. THEY ARE THE ONES THAT MATTER.

mrgerbik wrote:

Notez_ wrote:this is an ongoing war between me and some of the mp3 djs in my college...

...does their argument have any truth in it?

sorry but your mp3 dj friends are idiots. if they prefer mp3s for the convenience then so be it, but debating the sound quality of lossy digital compression versus a lossless source (especially vinyl) is straight retarded.

Haha..well..friends? Now i'll just post them this forum link and gloat in there faces.

Cosmic Surgeon wrote:

Paulie wrote:Probably more to do with them being used to hearing music on phones etc.

Aaah, the life affirming sound of tinny "bassline" tracks complemented by a roaring bus engine.

Sometimes you might even be lucky enough to get one of them 'spitting bars' in the back

yea

saying that vinyl is pure uncompressed is so not true, a lot of cheap press companies use mp3 instead of wav to press on vinyl... just rip some vinyls and check their bitrate, you'll see

but when a vinyl is pressed with wav then i must agree it sounds warmer but imo it doesn't sound better

Vinyl by far.....

Just to clarify, any material that goes through a mastering process is compressed. Hope that sorts the compression argument out for the umpteenth time.

And Mp3 compression and mastering compression are two different things.

hmmm what else... LOL

oh yeah another reasons why mp3 and CD sound crap compared to vinyl is due to the use of brickwall limiting, the death of dynamics as we know it.

escobar satan wrote:
THE CROWD DOESN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. THEY ARE THE ONES THAT MATTER.

they might not know why your set doesn't sound as good as the guy playing vinyl tunes but they will feel it and be aware of it

just rip some vinyls and check their bitrate, you'll see

how do you do that??

lossy digital compression versus a lossless source (especially vinyl)

vinyl = lossless ? i dunno... it sounds warmer but surely not because it's "lossless"

@ thread title

Reptilian wrote:

escobar satan wrote:
THE CROWD DOESN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. THEY ARE THE ONES THAT MATTER.

they might not know why your set doesn't sound as good as the guy playing vinyl tunes but they will feel it and be aware of it

TRUTH

Be-1ne wrote:Just to clarify, any material that goes through a mastering process is compressed. Hope that sorts the compression argument out for the umpteenth time.

And Mp3 compression and mastering compression are two different things.

hmmm what else... LOL

oh yeah another reasons why mp3 and CD sound crap compared to vinyl is due to the use of brickwall limiting, the death of dynamics as we know it.

brickwall limiting has to do with the mastering/mixdown not the format
if you take the same track both specifically mastered for vinyl and cd the only difference you'll notice is the colring to the sound different needles on a deck will give to it

TiKo wrote:saying that vinyl is pure uncompressed is so not true, a lot of cheap press companies use mp3 instead of wav to press on vinyl... just rip some vinyls and check their bitrate, you'll see

this does not make any sense, think about what you wrote there.

Also its down to the label to decide which file format they give to the plant. If they are stupid enough to use mp3's as a master they should give up the game !

OK technically Vinyls might be better quality because they are uncompressed and not sampled but I just did an experiment where I started playing a 128 kbps mp3 of nude and the vinyl of it through exactly the same sound system at the same time and just altinated between the two. And I swear I really couldn't tell any difference (And I was trying hard to hear it). I mean sometimes I thought I could tell a difference but to be honest I think if I was blindfolded and someone switched between the two I wouldn't know.

Maybe it's because I don't have a good enough sound system (cost about £300) or it wasn't loud enough or something but that's just my experience.

fleischhacker wrote:well CD can handle only 128k so ya better off with 320 burned with cd architect.