Re: Re(2): Re(2): TI-H: MP3s

To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: Re: Re(2): Re(2): TI-H: MP3s
From: "David Knaack" <dknaack@geocities.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:25:16 -0500
Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org


From: Gabe <Gabeman@Earthling.net>
>    What the hell are you babbling about? Don't try to make yourself
look
>like an 'eleet' audiophile. mp3's sound practically cd quality at
128k/44.1
>if they are encoded correctly.


Was that addressed to me??

What I said was, on my test equipment (P133, WinAmp, Marantz receiver,
monoblock amps and Snell E5's), MP3's did not sound as good as the
original CD.  'practically cd quality' is NOT CD quality, and I can
hear the
difference in many selections.

If you MP3 encode a pink noise sample, you can get an idea of what
artifacts you should be listening for.

I'm no audiophool, I just prefer to have music that has as few errors
as possible, because they do have an impact on the SQ!.

I would like to do testing with the DAC from a CD player, and I happen
to have two dead CD players, so I have some equipment to test with.

I don't give a fuck if you can't hear the difference, I CAN (in blind
testing),
so it makes a difference to me.

DK