16 bit files almost unlistenable now...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

It's not just the mastering engineer that is to be blamed:

 

 

 

Did she win American Idol...the more you screeeeeeeaaaammmmmm the more you connectttttttt.

 

I now have much greater respect for the poor engineer !

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

19 minutes ago, semente said:

 

Rando, I'm sorry to say this but your post lacks clarity. It could be the noise modulation, who knows, but I can't really understand what you are trying to say...

But I'm not an English language native so the problem might be in the conversion.

 

5 minutes ago, rando said:

I was plumbing the deep vein of female interest in audiophilia for starters.  Much of the music discussed in here is prime repertoire for the age group and sex I mentioned.  That was probably here nor there for the discussion.  

 

Beyond that was mainly noting the changes that happen as one learns to listen.  Perhaps @numlog would do well to get off the technological pinwheel long enough to reestablish something on this order.  Reaffirm the basis on which they judge recorded sound.  The very human subject of striving for perfection while benefiting from a certain amount of imperfection has been well covered.  No matter what the source material it will never perfectly represent the original article.  If he has reached the end of one road in his journey it might be time to explore down another or starting beating trail. 

 

That clears it up then, bet you're glad you asked ??

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

4 minutes ago, numlog said:

torrenting rips of CDs <> from a reputable site.

 

Is there such a thing as a reputable torrent site ?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 minutes ago, numlog said:

13 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Is there such a thing as a reputable torrent site ?

Yes.

 

So their reputation is based on downloading the music you already own ?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

7 minutes ago, numlog said:

9 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

So there reputation is based on downloading the music you already own ?

No.

 

So their reputation is based on downloading music you don't own ?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

5 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

Couldn't agree more. The music, performance, and recording/mastering quality are so much more important than the resolution.

 

You might say if its crap to begin with, increasing the resolution results in highly resolved crap! ?

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, MetalNuts said:

With modern digital equipment, some of the early digital recordings sound much better than they were before.

 

That's very true and something many people are reporting thanks to better digital playback gear and notable engineers and designers daring to think outside the box.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

47 minutes ago, MetalNuts said:

 

Yes, that is what I meant.  A good recording, irrespective it being made vinyl, redbook, high rez files or DSD, it sound good.

 

However, resolution should be able to enhance the quality.  For music files, it may not be that obvious to someone, but I do not believe anyone will dispute the quality in photography and videos that higher resolution can bring.

 

Yes true. You can polish gold but you can't polish a turd. The more you resolve crap the crappier it becomes.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, Andyman said:

the vertical scale is somewhat arbitrary

 

Very