Hub of Reason

. It's nice to have 5-6 audio CD's worth of music on a single MP3 CD - almost like having a CD changer in your hands. On the other hand, for critical listening on a HiFi, I feel that 256Kbps is the best bitrate to use, because it sounds significantly better than 192Kbps. Since I couldn't hear any improvement at all when going to up to 320Kbps, I don't recommend going this high for the simple reason that the file sizes are significantly larger."

""So what does this all mean? My feeling is that 192Kbps MP3 is more than adequate for listening with a computer or in a car. The distortion and lousy frequency response of the systems themselves (as well as the high ambient noise in a car) make the 192Kbps MP3 sound so similar to the original CD that the advantage of the smaller storage requirements of the MP3 far outweigh the sonic benefits of the CD."

This basically is just a bunch of personal "feelings" now.

"My feeling is that ..." is always a tip-off.

So ... the article, for all its fancy waveforms and "strict methodology" isn't really proving anything.

Sklivvz

Well, in the middle of the article, you can see they tested with blind listeners

and they did detect a difference

but when they tested again, with non pro listeners, they couldn't really tell

Robusto

Is a blind listener really a representative sampling? It is well-documented that blind people develop their aural acuity more than sighted people. So what?

Sklivvz

no, blind in the sense of ignorant of what they were listening to :-)

Robusto

Then you mean a blind test instead of a blind listener.

Sklivvz

2:07 PM

yes

in any case: I would probably consider finding reputable sources here for example

Robusto

So ... you're saying my source is not reputable?

Sklivvz

I am suggesting it could be better, that's all. Just advice.

Robusto

And none of your citations "could be better"? They are all perfect and unimpeachable?

Sklivvz

Absolutely not

Robusto

Then what's your point?

Sklivvz

2:10 PM

My point is that there are tons of not-so-good sources reaching a wide variety of conclusions. Why did you pick that one and not another? Why not a peer-reviewed source?

Then you asked for examples and I gave you some.

Robusto

The Google link you gave led to a lot of non-germane hits.

Sklivvz

Note: I am not arguing your answer is wrong, at all. It's just asking for more info about the source.

Well, Google isn't perfect :-)

Robusto

Look, if you don't want me to come around here, just say so. I came back after @Jeff Atwood stood up for me and thought I would give it another chance. Now I feel you are persecuting me, quite frankly.

Sklivvz

Robusto, absolutely not!

I have no problem whatsoever with you :-)

Robusto

You can have a really nice site that includes just you and the other mods, if that's what you want. It sure seems like that's what you're aiming for.

Sklivvz

2:12 PM

No, not really. Look. I know this site is different from the other SE sites.

And I know you are a great and valuable user on other sites.

Robusto

It is different. But perhaps not merely in the ways you imagine or admit.

Sklivvz

Well regarding sources, it was decided early on that they were necessary. I thought initially that wikipedia was ok, but I was shot down for example.

E.g. this is our meta question #5:

Q: Must all claims be referenced?

How strict should we be about references? When someone makes a claim, should we require them to support that claim with a source? If so, to what extent should we go? Must all claims be referenced or just some?

This is an example of what is intended by sources:

Q: List of useful sources for Skeptics.SE

The goal of this post is to contain a long number of sources, sorted by topic, to help users find sources for their answers. It's Community Wiki so that everyone can edit add new sources. Reliable sources: The following are sources that are accepted as valid sources to justify your statements...

discussion references citations

Robusto

I stand by the sources I cited. You have sources which, in at least one case, confirm the conclusion of my citation. And also offer subjective statements as evidence. Well, guess what? It should be apparent by now that this is a subjective issue. Years ago I read an article in The New Republic on this very issue, which had an interesting quote in it, from 1904, that claimed the quality of the gramophone recording was absolutely indistinguishable from live music!

Sklivvz

Ok, then why don't you reach the same conclusions in your answer? :-)

Robusto

Did you read my answer?

"I myself took a similar test and failed as much as I succeeded in identifying which track was which (160 vs 320), a result which is no better than random guessing. I can hear a very slight difference most of the time between LAME-encoded (--alt preset standard*) MP3 files and CD audio, but only on an expensive system with terrific speaks in a quiet room. For earbuds and car listening it doesn't really seem to matter."

Sklivvz

2:21 PM

Yes

I mean Robusto, why is it that I can't provide any constructive criticism here?

If you want to keep your answer as is, do it.

Don't get defensive if something is unclear and I ask for clarifications.

It's not a persecution or anything.

Robusto

I stand by my answer. And I don't get defensive unless I perceive that I am being attacked. Which is also a subjective perception.

Anyway, nice talking to you. I gotta run. Later.

Sklivvz

Ta, catch you

3 hours later…

Feeds

5:17 PM

Q: Noticing a Sudden Rash of Downvotes

So I was looking at my profile, and noticed that I had lost a great deal of reputation all of a sudden. And I didn't remember having recently downvoted any questions or answers. Generally I don't care about this sort of behaviour. If someone wants to be a vindictive jerk, that's their right. ...

discussion

Q: Sock-puppetry versus personal friends?

So, my best friend and daughter are members on this site. Generally they "stalk" me, and I appreciate their votes and such, however I am afraid that they may appear as "sock-puppets" to others. Which got me thinking, is there a way to monitor sock-puppetry? How does StackExchange deal with that?

discussion

« first day (79 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (4706 days later) »

all rooms