![am i not human two steps from hell mp3 am i not human two steps from hell mp3](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51U2HP5fSuL.jpg)
My wife refuses to listen to anything but “CD Audio”, and she always managed to pick out my (320 kbs)”mp3’s”, as sounding worse, against any of her Audio-CD’s. for goodness sake! I hope I do justice for this topic once and for all.įLAC, or WAV -everything else, especially “lossy ones” like mp3,… are just plain cr*p. But again, you can only hear such difference with a good Studio Monitor headphone and not through the speakers please with all the environment noises. In fact there is also a noticeable difference if u compare WAV with FLAC, don’t believe me? well try it for yourself then.
#Am i not human two steps from hell mp3 320kbps#
Through the 320kbps MP3, all the richness in the music is tone down slightly. From there on, I am sure you can tell the difference so clearly already especially when u try to compare music like Techno Trance with all the ambiance and beats in it. In order to detect this difference, you will need to use a very good Studio Monitor headphones and a headphone AMP will be desirable as well and not by using some ordinary crappy headphones for goodness sake. Even if you use a spectrum analyzer, you can certainly see the WAV holds a better spectrum compared to the MP3. How can a 320kbps MP3 has more details and richness compared to a massive 1536kbps of sound being spill out from a WAV file. It’s called Memorabilia by Mechanical MindsĬome on people, stop this bias … There is certainly and ABSOLUTELY a difference if u compare a 1536kbps WAV file between a 320kbps MP3 file of the same music. However, if you notice the biggest difference exists where the snare drum is hitting – and it’s no coincidence that snare drums contain the highest content of broadband sound. The loss is broadband information which is harder to perceive than designated frequency information. The mp3 quantizes differently, which is not a loss of sound – just a micro-auditory restructuring of sound. Not all of this represents loss of sound – it represents change in sound. The null test reveals the sonic difference between the two files. The frequency charts are identical, but as you can see the 2nd frequency chart (representing the mp3) has a steeper roll off after 16khz. I’ve attached a frequency chart and a null test. Sound Clip #2 *** DO NO READ BELOW UNTIL AFTER YOU TRY THE TEST *** Have a friend play these for you in random and see if you can hear a difference. In order that you don’t cheat (by looking at the file names or file load times), It’s hard to disguise the files using this format. Which file is the mp3, and which is the wav? The mp3 is only 25% the size as the wav, but is there a sonic trade off? Then I shot it through my iTunes mp3 encoder and yanked out a 320kb/s version. So I went into my vault and pulled out a 24bit wav file with plenty of harmonic content – all sorts of broadband sound just begging to be handled with kid gloves. file against a 320kb/s mp3 would be more useful. A number of people commented that a test between a pure wav. The audio test was between an MP3 of 320kb/s vs. I took an mp3 listening test here a while ago.