pablolie;333070 Wrote: > Indeed. In my book, that makes both flac and mp3 good choices when it > comes to longevity, but of course flac's ability to recreate the > original and take advantage of possible future psychoacoustic treatment > enhancements to redbook baseline (one can dream) an even more > futureproof choice in some ways.I agree completely, and I don't agree with > everyone that can tell the difference even with good equipment, it just doesn't jive with many tests done. It makes it sound like everyone can pick up artifacts in mp3's at 320. The can't and they don't. It is rare that one can and that is what is so great about the current lame. It's thrown around here like it is so obvious that there is an easily detectable difference. If it's so easy lets see some proof. It's just so casual to say yeah mp3 at 320 is ok but I can tell a difference. I hear it all the time even with people using car stereo's to tell the tale. There is no proof of this. Let's get some objective groups together to see if this is true unless you just know it is and keep wanting to say it is. I really would like to know. Then once done we can go to the people that can tell the difference between flac and wav. That one should be interesting. Don't worry I'm ducking as I speak. :)
-- Nonreality -IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU TO THIS, OF WHAT USE IS THE RULE.- HTTP://www.last.fm/user/nonreality ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nonreality's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=15723 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=51021 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
