Do normal people notice compressed audio (MP3 etc) sounds bad?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by head_unit, May 1, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Solitaire1

    Solitaire1 Carpenters Fan

    From what I understand, at lower bit rates AAC is better than MP3. However, at the higher bit rates (when using a modern MP3 encoder like LAME) it is basically a wash. When I need to use a lossy codec I use LAME encoded MP3s because they are compatible with all players.

    The reason I did the ABXY blind tests is to make sure that I'm hearing an actual difference, independent of other factors (such as equipment and the source), so I could decide where using a lossless codec is worth the larger file size (both on my hard drive and on my player). It was for myself, rather than relying on the opinion of others, and I came to the conclusion that I can't tell the difference between high quality MP3s (320kbps and highest-quality VBR) and Red Book FLAC.

    Returning to the topic, as I mentioned before I think it depends on the environment whether normal people notice the sound quality of MP3s (and other lossy codecs). Plus, I think it that would take a side-by-side comparison for some people to notice the difference.

    I had that experience in my early days of lossy audio when I took an early MP3 copy of "Calling Occupants Of Interplanetary Craft" by the Carpenters that I encoded at 128kbps that I thought sounded okay in my car. Then I compared it to a highest quality VBR MP3 of the same song from the same source and was surprised how much better the latter version sounded even in that environment (good car MP3 player, okay speakers). That led me to use the highest quality lossy encoding and then moving to FLAC, but don't think I would now be considered a normal listener.
     
    ogbbv, shaboo and Grant like this.
  2. Jack Flannery

    Jack Flannery Forum Resident

    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Right on! Like cables. You think it matters, it matters to you.
     
    The Pinhead likes this.
  3. Juan Matus

    Juan Matus Reformed Audiophile

    I just emailed some Foodies this thread and invited them to come participate here, I thought they would be really interested in trying to get audiophiles to eat some real food.

    http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...onalds-taco-bell-whatever-pt-3.392882/page-28
     
  4. cartologist

    cartologist Just the son of an Iowa girl

    Location:
    MA, USA
    To answer OP question, if it's below 256, no. I have a sensitive but not especially good ear, and I'm 55 and have been listening to loud rock n roll for over 40 years. My stereo systems (my 2006 Prius, which is subject to road noise, and my $99 Shure 215s) aren't up to it. I can always tell <256 by the tinny bass.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  5. cdash99

    cdash99 Senior Member

    Location:
    Mass
    A couple of years ago NPR had a test on their site, with samples of 6 tracks encoded as 128, 320, and lossless; I'm sure someone could find the link to see if it's still available.

    In listening through speakers on an iPad mini, I took the test with 3 of the tracks that I know very well. Speed of Sound by Coldplay and Tom's Diner by Suzanne Vega were two of them, I don't recall the third. After going back and forth, I was able to determine the lossless sample in all 3 cases.

    Here's the thing though, if the test was for them to play a sample and ask me as a listener what the bit rate was or if it was lossy/lossless, I don't believe that my ears are sensitive enough to make that determination.
     
  6. Sixbomb

    Sixbomb Well-Known Member

    Location:
    London, England
    I like FLAC, but that's because I now use decent portables and a headphone amp. For a long time I was perfectly happy with MP3 on an iPod and I can see why a lot of people stick with that.
     
  7. missan

    missan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Stockholm
    If exactly the same version people might choose a version with what they perceive having better SQ. If not exactly the same version, the SQ might be of minor importance. I cannot see a reason for, in that case, people should prefer the one with 'better' SQ.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2016
  8. SandAndGlass

    SandAndGlass Twilight Forum Resident

    Waxfreak,

    Actually... I think that it is more important with heavy metal then with Nora Jones (and I like Nora).

    Nora's music is mostly in the mids, her playing the piano centers around the 440-CPS "A". I never hear that much way down below or in the last two high octives, or more. Same with her singing voice, right dead in the middle.

    You could probably transmit a Nora Jones song over old analogue phone lines and play it back at the other end, matching impedance of course and it would sound fine.

    Take something like a quality Metal band/song like Led Zepplin's, Whole Lot of Love, it starts with deep, tight bass, goes through the whole band slamming their instruments, and on to crashing cymbals, with a lot of stuff going on in the higher registers. Gobs of dynamics.

    I think that this would be more of a challenge than Jora's music, if you want it to sound right. Of course, there a lot of crappy Metal bands out there with equally crappy or worse recordings which wouldn't sound any different at 128-KBPS.
     
    The Pinhead likes this.
  9. InStepWithTheStars

    InStepWithTheStars It's a miracle, let it alter you

    Location:
    North Carolina
    If this is talking about the dynamic range compression, I can't say. Evidently not as CDs continued to be squashed and satellite radio has apparently outlawed peaks and troughs.

    If it's about file compression, though, definitely not. Because I cannot tell the difference at all. My whole collection is 128 KBPS MP3s played through cheap-o earbuds on a crappy iPhone that folds everything down to mono, and I think it sounds great. I tried importing my collection as a higher resolution file (I think it was FLAC but I could be mistaken - this was a long time ago) but stopped when my phone ran out of space after storing just one third of my collection. The files sounded no different to me, so I erased them and put back on the "low quality" ones. 15 GB for about 300 albums, rather than 50 for 100, and I can't hear a difference at all. Maybe I shouldn't be on this forum at all then, but hey, good community, lots of discussion about music...
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  10. Schoolmaster Bones

    Schoolmaster Bones Poe's Lawyer

    Location:
    ‎The Midwest
    One burden you're overlooking is the nuisance of physical media. Today, most "normal people" would gladly pay a bit more to not have to deal with the hassle of going to a store (or waiting for their Amazon item to arrive) only to go through the bother of ripping the CD themselves to the format they wanted in the first place. The media - keep in mind - that sounds identical (to them) to the CD.

    I'd say it's a mistake to assume most "normal people" today are even set up to listen to CDs - or would even want to be.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  11. Rob9874

    Rob9874 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Surprise, AZ
    I rip my CDs to iTunes at 320, but did a test last night, ripping a couple of my favorite CDs in Apple Lossless for an A/B test today. I'm listening in my 2015 Pathfinder with my iPhone 6S, using the lightning jack through USB (as I don't have an aux-in jack in the car). I tried my best, and couldn't hear any difference. Not saying there isn't a difference, but with the system I'm using to listen with my iPhone, add in road noise, etc, I can't tell any difference. Not sure I would need better than 320.
     
  12. Pastafarian

    Pastafarian Forum Resident

    I suspect when CD sales really do decline, that they'll disappear more quickly than vinyl. The physical interaction with all that art work just won't be attached to the music.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  13. The Pinhead

    The Pinhead KING OF BOOM AND SIZZLE IN HELL

    :yikes:
     
  14. Atmospheric

    Atmospheric Forum Resident

    Location:
    Eugene
    I'm appalled by the number of musicians (who presumably should know better) who think YouTube audio is acceptable quality.

    Bad sound quality just ruins things for me.
     
  15. InStepWithTheStars

    InStepWithTheStars It's a miracle, let it alter you

    Location:
    North Carolina
    Maybe I shouldn't be confessing that stuff around here... :D
     
    IronWaffle likes this.
  16. Dennis0675

    Dennis0675 Hyperactive!

    Location:
    Ohio
    yes and no. People generally do not notice it but they are impacted by it. I was talking to someone at work today about satellite radio and I asked, "do you notice that when you listen to it you are changing channels more than you are listening to music?" She said that she did and I suggested that part of the issue is that the sound is so compressed it is causing you to switch the station more often. If it sounds better it will hold your attention longer.
     
  17. Schoolmaster Bones

    Schoolmaster Bones Poe's Lawyer

    Location:
    ‎The Midwest
    I used to do the same thing with FM radio. Cable television as well, come to think of it.

    All this time it was because of the compression!
     
    SandAndGlass, Myke and Dennis0675 like this.
  18. timztunz

    timztunz Audioista

    Location:
    Texas
    Who is normal?
     
    IronWaffle, Grant and Dennis0675 like this.
  19. Dennis0675

    Dennis0675 Hyperactive!

    Location:
    Ohio
    well ADD does have something to do with it but I seriously doubt that you switched FM channels with the frequency that one might a lossy format. I drive quite a bit and primarily listen to Satellite. For the first time in a couple years I grabbed a couple CD's for traveling this week and I was struck by not only how much better it sounded but that I also didn't hit the skip button or even think about it. Just an observation, I think the people might be impacted by lossy formats without realizing it. It might also explain part why people are not buying music like they once did. I get that there are free options but radio has always been free and albums still sold.
     
  20. Dennis0675

    Dennis0675 Hyperactive!

    Location:
    Ohio
    me, super normal
     
    timztunz likes this.
  21. ogbbv

    ogbbv Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Oslo
    Low bitrate is a big deal here in Norway and lots of folks are complaining all the time, this come mostly from the change to DAB from FM radio. DAB can sound really good when there is coverage, but when the signal get really low it downsamples so low that it sounds just like the worst MP3s you have ever heard, and 1 million people are listening to this everyday to work. So the common man complain a lot about that here. They also have DAB in the UK and Techradar made an article: Why DAB radio in the UK is broken, and how to fix it | TechRadar »

    In reply to Solitaire1;
    I agree that Lame MP3 has become really good and I remember those 192 kbps stuff that I snatched from Napster and they still sound really awful even though they have medium-high bitrate.
    But I keep reading this that MP3 is compatible with all players and AAC is not and such and just have to chime in to say that this do not resonate with my experience.
    I am not everybody ofcourse but I have never ever encountered a player in the last 10 years that not have been able to do AAC. Even my 11 year old Euro Ford Focus plays it, all my TVs have played it and lots of obscure-brandname cheap "MP3"- players have supported it. It is no reason for me to encode to MP3 today but this is only in my opinion.
     
  22. The FRiNgE

    The FRiNgE Forum Resident

    A HOT hit parade record actually did sound pretty good on one of these.

    BTW, I learned to play guitar at an early age, and formed a band, so my ear had become trained to live sound. It was a series of events that led to getting hooked on hifi, my father's Grundig radio, which sounded way better than my little Voice of Music record player. A fellow guitarist and friend from high school owned a pair of Pioneer omni-directional speakers. He played a few "Poco" songs that his new band was to cover (I was to be a member) I was impressed by the sound he got from his system. My high school had a well equipped music room, a Bogen turntable, Teac Reel to Reel, (probably the 4010 model) a Pioneer integrated amp, and pair of unknown speakers, probably Altec coaxes in smaller wall mounted boxes. (impressive sound from these) I used to bring in my Jeff Beck "Truth" reel to reel tape to play on the school system before class. We students were not really allowed to handle the equipment, so I got yelled at! Mr. Duane, our music theory instructor screamed "You're going to BLOW the speakers, stop the tape, STOP IT !! " The speakers did not blow. At that point I was not a hifi enthusuast, but appreciated great sound. My little Sony TC-255 reel to reel was for recording our band practices and gigs, and used my bandmate's Fender Deluxe Reverb for playing back our recordings... or using my Lafayette headphones directly in the deck.

    The 1969 Deluxe Reverb sounded surprisingly good for reproducing hifi, the bass on 3 and treble on 1. (plugged the L ch in ch-1 and the R ch in ch-2) The high freqs did reproduce fairly well as the standard "Fender Special Design" Oxford speaker (blue label) was closer to a full range speaker vs a Jensen or Celestion. Contrary to popular belief, most 60's Fender amplifiers came with Oxford speakers, the original Fender circuits designed to produce Fender tone with that speaker. The Jensen speakers and Celestions are more rolled off, less detailed, and break up differently. Guitar heaven is plugging into a vintage Deluxe Reverb (properly recapped) with the original Oxford speaker. Few of these remain in existence, as many were replaced with the "warmer" Jensen, or the Oxfords simply blew and were replaced. The Twin Reverb, Bandmaster, and Showman amps could be ordered with optional JBL D-120, or D-130 speakers, almost a true high fidelity full range speaker. These highly efficient speakers were extremely loud and articulate, reproduced amazing clean sound, extended range for vocals and wonderful for clean guitar, but too harsh for overdriven sound.

    I was not a hifi person at that point, didn't own any stereo gear, had no desire to.. but appreciated great sound.

    It was in 1974, when a co-worker/electrician apprentice admired my 8 track system in my '69 GTO. I had purchased the first power amp ever produced for car stereo, a Craig 12w per ch unit, and demo'd it to my friend. He asked what I listened to at home. Embarrassed by the truth, I admitted I didn't own any stereo gear. He invited me over to listen to his, insisted that I had to buy something decent to listen to at home. He played "Who's Next" on his Sansui system. To me at that point, his system sounded amazing. I saved my paychecks, and got started in a lifetime of great sound from my records and tapes.

    I knew good sound, just needed that extra nudge to motivate.
    Sadly, most "millennials" have never heard good sound, and I hope their ears hold out. I was lucky mine did.
    Even today's concerts sound extremely shrill and boomy, (as do car stereos as a blanket statement) just horrible, as do the DJ live sound systems. (just awful sound.. Loud.. but not good)

    Somehow I hope this will improve. We certainly have the technology to make it happen. I think for the most part, the public demands a certain sound, more bass to the point it smothers the music, and ear piercing treble to cut through the bass, and a "louder" more "powerful" sound via hard compression/ limiting. It's just a tragic loss, and a gross assault to the ears, IMO. Back in the 80's, the next generation after mine, young people "hated" midrange. As no surprise, the 80's was the era of the rack system, the era of the graphic equalizer, usually scooped to the max to get rid of the midrange... the good ol' 80's (haha)

    My nephew invited me to a popular local club. He said, "uncle Steve they have a great sound system there". I didn't have the heart to criticize, but it was the typical bass boom and ear piercing club system. The only club that actually sounded awesomely great, was a disco in "Apple Valley", circa 1974, a place near Poughkeepsie, NY. The system consisted of four Bose 901 speakers suspended from the ceiling, (four corners of the lighted dance floor) with a sub hidden somewhere. The sound was crisp, articulate, bass you could feel, truly loud and good sounding. Another great sound experience at a live Cowboy Junkies concert back in the 90's at the "Last Chance" in Poughkeepsie. I got Margo Timmon's autograph, on my shirt, OMG she touched me! :) :)

    rock on,
    Steve VK
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2016
    SandAndGlass and IronWaffle like this.
  23. toddrhodes

    toddrhodes Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Bend, IN
    I'm a "smiley face" EQ convert. I think midrange - since we're so sensitive to it - is a make or break to sound quality. But, when it's done right, it transforms the ordinary system into the exceptional system. And, I think that's because we're so sensitive to it. I'm not trying to be contradictory, but I guess that's the knife's edge you find yourself on when it comes to that all important range of frequencies. Vinyl was the start; I don't know if it's distortion or euphonics or what, but midrange is more pleasing to me on vinyl. So much so, I've now gone to a tube preamp and will be adding a tube phono pre as soon as it gets to my house. I feel like if you can accentuate mids but not make them distracting, the entire experience moves up a notch. And I have 3-way speakers so that adds even more to midrange emphasis. And I have quite a few Brit pressings which also really seem to nail midrange reproduction.

    But, hearing a vocal that not only sounds like a real person but captures all of the things that went into the vocal, the etched outline of the vocalist in front of you because you don't just hear the sound that comes from their mouth, you hear their diaphragm and their breathing and the harmonics afterward... that's where it starts to get special IMO.
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  24. Linolad

    Linolad Forum Resident

    Very funny!
     
  25. The Pinhead

    The Pinhead KING OF BOOM AND SIZZLE IN HELL

    That's why I stopped going to concerts in the first place; I could achieve better sound at home. Watching a band at a pub or small bar with only the musician's monitors and unamplified drums was glorious. The came the PA systems with treble eqd to the max and 130 db everywhere you went to fry your ears. Yuck !
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine