I think the problem here is, You guys are comparing low quality MP3's to FLAC.
Therefore herp derp.
I only grab FLAC files to ensure I have high quality files.
You guys should be looking at FLAC in the same manner.
they used 320kbp/s .mp3 is that not the highest quality mp3 format *commonly* avaliable?
I was speaking to OP. And those that agree with him.
I'm sure they wouldn't mind but maybe the orchestra that actually recorded the version of it and sold a cd through say like Sony could.
However I get what you mean; there are many sources of legally available music which could be more useful for an example piece in a test.
That's also a good point. But most common MP3 files are not that high of a bitrate. They should have done a comparison with a low bitrate mp3, as well. Because there is a huge difference.
OP wants to sound smart... Don't we all? First, did you read this: https://teksyndicate.com/videos/audiophile-myths-part-1-mp3-vs-flac-cables-sample-rates-tube-amps-etc?
I list the other songs that I tested... Also, I want to note that I did the encoding myself from my own wav/FLAC files.
The purpose of the video was to illustrate what a blind test is. I only have rights to my own music on YouTube. I can't illustrate a blind test with someone else's music because my video will get flagged. So, I figured that our users were smart enough to understand this... and I figured they would go and do their own tests before going online and calling me a retard... I don't think I'm asking too much of the audience. I have seen several threads pop up online (4chan, overclock.net, reddit, etc.) with similar sentiments (to commodore256)... Do people really expect me to use music that I do not own the rights to? These kids do not know how the world works. My video will be DMCAed to hell.
Also, arguing against the sample that I used in the video is nonsense. The test method is ALL that we should be talking about. We had some crazy EQ that I was messing with active for the video (this was one take, live then edited together), but I did test with a flat EQ on my own (thanks to most of you for giving me the benefit of a doubt)... Also, I listed the other songs tested in the article attached to the video... People are just too lazy to read the article... or wait, no... I think people love to sound smart and they will jump at a chance to call someone a retard... if it makes them sound smarter.
This issue is deeper than I thought and even many of our members are falling for it... It seems to be what I outlined above plus laziness, stupidity, ignorance. People are too lazy to do their own blind tests (with files they encoded themselves)... if they did the tests they would see that I was proving a point and think, "Damn, these files do sound almost the same 95% of the time."... The stupidity/ignorance is in the fact that they are wasting everyone's time in arguing nonsense and avoiding the overall point. It basically turns everything to mud and when viewers get caught in it... they sometimes end up drowning in it.
Commodore256. I'd like an apology... after you do your own blind tests. In the future look deeper into things before you try to sound smart on the internet.
I really value our members. I think we have a group that is way ahead of the members on most sites. Let's use this thread as a good example of how not to argue. There may be faults with videos and such, but this sort of criticism is a total waste of time.
PS. This is a great resource: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ#t=39
First off, I really want an asshat. Sounds like my kinda party.
Secondly, to Logan, don't let this get your goat. These guys wouldn't talk this way face to face. Something happens behind a keyboard that turns people into rude _unts.
I think if you look around there are more constructive and civil arguments on here than the OP's. Still loving your vids and I'd actually like to see more on this obviously controversial topic.
Indeed. Thanks Jay. I do try hard to listen to criticism. At the same time... you can't please everyone. I just want to help them if I can. Anyway, I better go do the tek.
For OP argument, let's debunk it very easily.
Argument over sample encoding is worth nothing for few reasons:
1. More variation/complexity (in anything, same goes for video) = larger file, it is =/= degraded quality.
2. Bitrate, again, live/analog sorce = infinite bits, yet, it doesn't neccessarily means higher quality after certain point is passed. And that was argued in video anyway....
3. Even symphony orchestra would sound the same, it will just take up more space, due tot eh complexity encoding process need to do (under assumption that exacly same method is used, and same durration).
You can do it!!!!
The thing about it is the Tek Syndicate team does a lot of stuff they don't really have to do but they are doing it for us. They have helped me out a lot and I thank them. Going onto the forum and calling somebody a retard is just not nice to do. Retard is a word that is not socially acceptable because you are making fun of a group of people that can not defend themselves. Dude you never know what tomorrow holds so think before insulting somebody calling them a retard
I'm not even going to try and wade into this one. So, I'll just be over here.
I've never seen Logan talk this much in a thread ever! Maybe that was op's intention from the start.... But jokes aside I don't believe its that big of a deal if the results are true or not in the audiophile video. Take it for what it is and if you feel differently about how the results should have been do it yourself and make a constructive argument, Or better yet just be happy with knowing your right and their wrong (in your opinion) and leave it at that, You don't have to share everything you believe on the internet.
In the spirit of Gif's
and Logan if you do read this I just want you to know that I personally agree with you on the subject and I love all the content in general, But I still want that banana fight video!
I really don't think there is a difference between FLAC and High quality MP3s. But not everyone has HIGH quality MP3s. If you take the lower quality, more common ones, there is a difference.
Why not get a guest who isn't just a fanboy (audiophile) but a legitimate talent in the sound design/creation world on your channel. I've been watching Dave Pensado's channel on youtube for a while now and some of the things said by his guests (huge talents/legends) just go completely against what the general consensus is about certain things in audio on the internet. My post is probably hard to read but I just woke up and it's 5pm for fucks sakes.
The guest (I believe?) Makes and sells DACs.
You are correct, Mayflower assembles an open source DAC and amp called Objective ( ODAC and O2) respectively. Tyler's company is one of a few different companies that manufacture Objective DACs and amps, which I believe is good cause not everyone has the ability or knowledge to make them, and some people have trouble getting that stupid Tenor USB controller from US distributors :(
Yes, he make a open source headphone amp called the Objective2 (O2) designed by NwAvGuy, and a open source ObjectiveDAC (ODAC) designed by NwAvGuy and Yoyodyne Consulting.
Both are excellent products and value for money......but when someone has a financial interest in solid state amps, and then goes on the Tek and slag off tube headphone amp, it can get people back up..........well it got my back up!
Think a Electrical engineer would have been a good choose to do these video with.
(But the guy is smart and clearly knows the subject of headphone, think sweeping statements and diplomacy my be a sight issue though......and I would like to say the Objective2 is excellent and there kits and full builds look really good! )