That’s not the topic. We are discussing on what the websites advertise to have in download vs. what they really have. I can feel @pratyahara frustration: I’m too a music lover, always looking for best quality of download

 

Last edited: Sep 16, 2020

The situation is rather different with new music, and files posted by authors themselves.

 

If you want to be 100% sure about file quality, a decent option is Tidal hifi (Monthly fee $20 - flac streaming with listen offline option), an even better option HDtracks (album price starts from $15 pay for download - flac, alac, aiff, wav, DSD. files are in high bitrate also)

 

Yeah, and I'm telling you that the people who upload and self-report this stuff don't even really necessarily know themselves what the hell the bitrate is. If you're concerned about this, simply start using Spotify and all your problems are solved. It really is that simple.

 

still offtopic, try again, but this time saying something logical

 

Spotify, soundcloud, facebook and other services sell encoded files, for them it's not a waste of time. Anyway if they do not cheat they need a source (= WAV) file. So, in most cases you need a CD as a starting point to get a genuine [email protected] CDA grabbing happens to WAV first, no matter what the final format is (FLAC, mp3, etc.) in order to shrink size.
Original WAV = for that.

 

Last edited: Sep 16, 2020

'People making claims mostly per their beliefs' might just as well include you, believing more to statistics than your own ears. But your beliefs come from somebody else, remember.
So maybe you just could let us 'audiophiliacs' proceed with "other discussions" in here, not lecturing us. And you can continue 'not to care' without a hitch.

 

Last edited: Sep 16, 2020

Those P2P people had been mostly capturing in 128 kbps for decades. Now re-sellers are using their legacy as '320 kbps'.

 

Don't worry, you only have to read this and not even watch the video considering you seem to know your stuff in this topic.
https://audiosex.pro/threads/is-this-flac-file-still-better-compared-to-mp3.55422/page-2#post-500865

 

i thought that was a myth?

 

So you advertise downloading low grade files because people don't know what the bitrate is?
Spotify is in no way better than the others, what problem does it 'solve'?.

 

@Xupito You disappoint me. I hoped you understood that this video is completely debunked in the same thread...
Some girl pressing the buttons. What's scientific about that.

 

The starting point is no longer the cd (limited to 44.1k-16bit), most of the current audio formats all have wav sources, in fact files on sale are in hi-res (48k-24bit up to 96k)

 

I have seen it and while he actually makes great points, the most robust point you can make is just actually look at the research on the matter. Various MUSHRA studies where the listeners aren't people with expensive equipment but actually people who are trained to hear the differences between codecs. They dedicate portion of their life just to be able to do something THAT niche. And I can guarantee to you that this person is not one of them, because these people know their position very well.

What that video is actually good for though, is to point out that you certainly do NOT need golden ears as a mixing engineer and that you should be dubious about people who claim to have them and hear minute differences in ridiculous things.

However I love what a shitshow that thread is, holy shit. Some people get really defensive in this topic because it kind hurts to know that all the thousands of dollars you spent on your precious superior listening experience was mostly in vain, all the while kids rocking with their KRK's manufacted in China (the VTX's though are German-made) get to enjoy as much as you do, without even having to buy an external amp!

 

Torrents suck anyway. Too many idiots spoiled that soup. "You can't join unless you share these files this much." Some of us ain't got no time for that.
One major problem is upconverting. People are stupid enough to think it can make things sound better. WTF people?
Try checking the freindly sites on the sister site.

 

That being said, it might as well be 44.1k-16bit because there is absolutely no way for even a trained expert to hear any difference above that. But 24bit 48khz is a good standard because it (48khz in particular) translates better for audiovisual production and syncing to framerates. It was popular for movies, and a good idea for artists in general in case they want to, say, make a professional music video.

But as far as purely audio goes, it's the same result whenever you use 44.1khz-16bit or anything above that, all the mathematical differences will fade away in the compression.

 

If you are producing music you should have good ears. Listeners don't need them.

 

I did not mean CDA (Red Book) only, but also DVD audio. Sorry I wasn't precise enough.

 

Watch the video previously mentioned. Due to physiology of human beings & aging, old people actually tend to have really, really bad hearing. Just light their sight is guaranteed to be messed up eventually, so will their hearing.

Then contrast this with the fact that many of the industry top dogs (Dave Pensado et al) are old farts and still employed by the industry.

So no, you don't need shit for hearing, because I can guarantee that lot of the most valued people in the industry just don't have good hearing anymore and yet still work all the same as they always did. You don't even need neutral listening environment - even that meme is only ever good for one and only thing; one neutral listening environment translates well into another, so if you can mix in a treated, neutral studio, you can mix in any other similar studio just as well.

Isn't life cool?

 

You talk as if you know about professionals in the industry. YOU DO NOT!!
The pro's protect their hearing because they make a living off of it.
They also have way more experience in critical listening and yes they can at old age identify things you could never find in sound.
I can tell the difference between 24bit and 16bit. I doubt you can.

Quiz: What part of the sound would you be able to hear the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit?