Audio Empire wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 04:00:45 -0700, Romy the Cat wrote
(in article ):
What I found the most amassing in this story is that presentation was
made for Audio Engineering Society and it looks like they were
AMAZED!!!
I think that they were amazed by the sound of the difference signal between
the unaltered master and the compressed copy. It was that so much
"extraneous" info was removed from the master that it was apparently possible
to still tell what the music was supposed to be and who was singing it.
That's a lot of loss.
But that's the whole point of psychoacustic compression! Remove what
psychoacustic model deems unhearable (because it's masked by the other
parts of the signal, and our brain could not preceive it).
Wether that psychoacustic model is right or wrong is another story,
though. And that's why telling that you hear artifacts with 320bps mp3's
without disclosing encoder used is pretty useless. In lossy compression
world 320bps does not necessarily equal 320bps (from another encoder).
rgds
\SK
--
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity" -- Notebooks of L.L.
--
http://www.tajga.org -- (some photos from my travels)