opaqueice;279208 Wrote: > Let's see: > > > > He is arguing that MP3 is distorted and inferior, and part of his > evidence is that the files are smaller. As I have demonstrated (and > you agree), that is an invalid argument since two files of different > size may have precisely the same audio quality, and two files of the > same size may have different quality. > > Now, it's true that there is a connection between the smallest file > size a given amount of information can ever be compressed into and the > information content. But a better way to address that would be > something like this: take a WAV file ripped from a CD and zip it, then > compare that to a zipped 128 MP3 of the same track. > > -That- would give you a valid comparison, up to the limitations of the > zip algorithm, and it will not give you the factor of 10 he mentions > (it will give a factor that depends on the WAV file, for one thing). I am sorry but I do not think you understand his quote. He says that an mp3 MUST loose data in order to have such small file sizes. You can not argue that fact, that is the definition of a lossly compression. Which is all you quoted was someone describing a lossly compresson method. Also he never says or implies that mp3 are distorted, but the fact is they do not contain all of the original data.
-- m1abrams ------------------------------------------------------------------------ m1abrams's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=850 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=44532 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
