Is it the same with Lame compression? Ive read a few tests done with so called "pro" people, that was done compearing MP3 Lame, ACC, and Wav, in a blind test at 192 and 320 khz. No one got it right. Of cource normal MP3 is eazy to spot, but Lame suposedly do the trick..james0tucson wrote:I've ruined it for a couple of people who claimed to be happy with MP3. I told them "just listen to the cymbals, that's where you'll hear a lot of the high frequency stuff that supposedly doesn't matter."egbert wrote: Listening to a mix with drums - esp cymbals - makes picking the source wav from the mp3 really easy.
After that, it was like they suddenly were aware of audio quality for the first time. It's kind of sad, since they thought they were happy before, but not after.
New x86-based Macs are out!
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 27 Nov, 2003 from Oslo, Norway
-
- KVRist
- 141 posts since 10 Jul, 2003 from Zagreb, Croatia
that cut at 17khz happens only when you encode with xing or other lame encoder. try lame encoder with razorlame or easylame gui, using good settings and then come back.machinesworking wrote: Well it's not a big mystery that mp3s cut off the bottem at 30Hz and the top at 1700Khz.
-
- KVRist
- 277 posts since 6 Mar, 2003
I don't think you will find many people who can hear the different between a 192 khz(or 320 khz) mp3 and the original wave file. I tested it myself: I could only hear the differend if it was a song where there where lots of dynamic differences (like in a classical piece), but with gernes like rock and dance, it's a lot harder to hear the differnece.
On topic:
As a pc (windows) user, i have to admid that Mac OSX is more beautifull than the ugly XP, and it also nicer to work with. But I won't chance to Mac because than i lose lots of my freeware tools.
And Windows on Mac seems stupit to me (than you have a overpriced (but beautifull designed) pc with a crappy OS (XP)).
On topic:
As a pc (windows) user, i have to admid that Mac OSX is more beautifull than the ugly XP, and it also nicer to work with. But I won't chance to Mac because than i lose lots of my freeware tools.
And Windows on Mac seems stupit to me (than you have a overpriced (but beautifull designed) pc with a crappy OS (XP)).
-
machinesworking machinesworking https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8505 - KVRAF
- 8103 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle
Well, when it will seem pretty cool is if Virtual PC turns into a monster now that it can use it's native chips, and simply loses a small amount of resources to OSX running as host.... This could be pretty cool for us mac audio types if they can figure out some sort of jack tools/FX Teleport/ internal network trick to get MIDI in and out of Virtual PC to OSX.ludwig wrote:And Windows on Mac seems stupit to me (than you have a overpriced (but beautifull designed) pc with a crappy OS (XP)).
-
- KVRAF
- 4266 posts since 21 Oct, 2001 from my bolthole in the south pacific
Something which is coming soon to a PC or Macintel near you is virtualization. Intel's latest P4s and Xeons and the forthcoming Merom based desktop and laptop chips (Sept 06) and also AMDs next lot of Opterons and Athlon64s (also 2H this year) will all have this feature. I gather from what discussion of this I have seen that it will mean that a machine with this capability will be able to run more than one OS simultaneously with each OS seeing itself as being in control of the machine but really only being in control of one of a set of virtual machines.machinesworking wrote:Well, when it will seem pretty cool is if Virtual PC turns into a monster now that it can use it's native chips, and simply loses a small amount of resources to OSX running as host.... This could be pretty cool for us mac audio types if they can figure out some sort of jack tools/FX Teleport/ internal network trick to get MIDI in and out of Virtual PC to OSX.ludwig wrote:And Windows on Mac seems stupit to me (than you have a overpriced (but beautifull designed) pc with a crappy OS (XP)).
The implications are that you could - say - have Linux running your connection to the internet and WinXP/Vista running your local apps and getting its internet connection from the Linux machine - just as if it were on another computer. The security implications are pretty interesting if this works as has been described. It also makes Win/Mac setups possible I guess. Watch this space.