"Ears Guys"

[JJkizak]

All of you with good ears, what is the first thing affected when the bitrate is not enough for complex music and gravely voices? Is it distortion or just nothing there?

JJK

[Schu]

for me, I think it is granularity.

[Ski Bum]

Not sure about gravely voices, but listen to the decay of cymbals.  Low bit rate always screws them up to my ears.

 

Wait a minute! I'm stone deaf, and you were asking of those with good ears.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Ski Bum

[Thaddeus Smith]

compressed or lossless music? bitrate has different meanings and effects when you're listening to mp3 vs. FLAC.

[joessportster]

Assuming you are talking about other than flac lower bit rates I would agree with Schu, the sound gets grainy and dry IMHO

 

Cymbals will sizzle more than shimmer (sound more like static than a cymbal as they decay) 

[OO1]

Assuming you are talking about other than flac lower bit rates I would agree with Schu, the sound gets grainy and dry IMHO

 

Cymbals will sizzle more than shimmer (sound more like static than a cymbal as they decay) 

The man spoke well -

[DrWho]

Quantization distortion is fundamentally the result of removed information.

Ironically, it results in new information that wasn't there originally. So it's both a lack of detail and the addition of "buzz" that sounds like grain when it's small enough.

Btw, the analog world is also quantized so it's not just a digital thing. That's why quality of analog components can sometimes matter...

[etc6849]

Wait, are you guys saying that a CD can't adequately (with 100% accuracy) produce frequencies up to 22kHz?  If so, what are the technical reasons for this?  Is it due to imperfect filters in the real world?

 

I wholeheartedly trust math and nyquist's sampling theorum.  I know I only have book knowledge though and have never designed anything.

Edited March 14, 2015 by etc6849

[DrWho]

Nyquist theory assumes infinite bit depth and a rock solid sampling clock. Neither exist in the real world.

Nyquist is merely a limit, not a reality.

[Chris A]

It is possible to hear decay differences in very special circumstances on 44.1 kHz recordings relative to higher bit rate PCM or perhaps DSD recordings on the same disc.  Note that there are many "upsampled" recordings being sold online of old recordings from either analog tapes or even digital source files. 

 

You cannot "make fidelity" in a recording that wasn't captured in the first place, so save your money on these (unless you buy this music only to impress your friends).  In general I've found that the quality of all recordings that I've dealt with is dominated by the recording, mixing, and mastering processes used--not recording bit rates, 

 

I'd first look at the finished tracks first in some sort of analysis tool for evidence of editing of tracks before commenting on decay qualities inherent in different bit rates or even format of recording media.  IMHO, you'll probably find the reason for the listening differences attributable to editing rather than bit rates.

 

Chris

[Quiet_Hollow]

It's also worth noting that audible differences between the higher sampling rates for PCM audio are, in large part, due not from the increased number of samples, but rather the relaxing of the low-pass filters required for the higher rates.

[joessportster]

Chris is right I did omit the fact that the original source makes all the difference in the world, I focused on the thought that you were referring to how a lower bit example of a track will differ SQ wise from a higher rate example of the same material

 

 

all the added bit depth in the world will not add SQ to the original, but lowering the rate does affect the SQ

 

 

I find myself very happy with CD quality Recordings and I mostly pick up higher rate recordings when they offer something more ie.... more tracks, variations of tracks, better / different mastering.....................

[JJkizak]

When I listen to the FM-HD local station most of the time it is crystal clear (80 db SPL) and then on comes an Aerosmith track and the voices are hacky and the cymbals

sound like mushy instead of tinkly clear. Then some Journey's are crystal clear and others not. The station does play the gamut of monaural, stereo, and other stuff.

Hendrix voice tends to be a bit scratchy as others. I just wondered how much they process the signal because most of the stuff is excellent. I don't get this on vinyl or cd's or DVD's or the TV sound input.

JJK

[wvu80]

My ears were professionally tested by an audiologist in a sound-proof room when I was in my mid-20's.  I could hear 17,000Hz, and I think what the audiologist told me that distinguished me was that I did not have a "hole" in my hearing.  She said is it was normal to have a frequency range at some point that just did not register for most people, mine seemed to be consistent throughout the entire range.

 

Recently I have self-tested using speakers and headphones off the internet tests, and I can hear to about 12,000 hz.  There is nothing above that.  I know that is not a good test, but I was curious and wanted an informal idea of my hearing range.

 

When I hear a low bitrate like 144p or 240p on Youtube, it is almost completely un-listenable.  It sounds harsh and feels like I am listening to music with some other annoying distortion sound playing at the same time.  360p is OK, but 480 is pretty good.  After that at 720p and 1024p, I can hear very little improvement.

 

I know Youtube audio doesn't translate into a true bitrate, but I used that because I thought it would be a good common point of reference.

 

I don't know if you guys know, but your left ear processes music differently than the right.  When I listen to the crappy speaker on my phone, I listen better with my left ear because I understand and hear the voice more clearly.  The right ear is supposed to be better for music, but for me personally I can hear better music with my left, for what ever reason.

 

http://www.hear-it.org/Your-ears-differ-

Edited March 14, 2015 by wvu80

[Quiet_Hollow]

YouTube has to accept whatever is uploaded by the users, and passes that on to the viewers. There's always a wide margin of quality because of that. The content directly reflects the capability of the user.  The final result spans far from ideal to very good, but regardless the streaming quality has improved significantly over the last decade.

 

The really big thing recently is that they've started accepting broadcast-quality audio at 16/48 for general account holders. I've witnessed excellent results because this, even though the final stream is still AAC encoded. The difference is not subtle.

 

20 years late to the DV party, but better than never I guess.... for us "ears". 

[TwoCables]

When I listen to the FM-HD local station most of the time it is crystal clear (80 db SPL) and then on comes an Aerosmith track and the voices are hacky and the cymbals

sound like mushy instead of tinkly clear. Then some Journey's are crystal clear and others not. The station does play the gamut of monaural, stereo, and other stuff.

Hendrix voice tends to be a bit scratchy as others. I just wondered how much they process the signal because most of the stuff is excellent. I don't get this on vinyl or cd's or DVD's or the TV sound input.

JJK

 

I think that this is an unfair comparison because there's no way to know what they are using on that station. I mean, you have to wonder: are they using nothing but MP3s? If so, then are some of those MP3s in 128k? I mean, just what are they using: CDs, music files on a computer, or what?

 

I would bet though that the lower-quality songs you're hearing are 128k MP3s. Go ahead and find songs in 128k MP3s and compare them to their 320k MP3 versions. Or better yet, compare 128k MP3s to something lossless like FLACs (but again, it has to be the exact same song/recording). You might hear a very similar sound quality to what you're hearing on this FM-HD station at times. However, even if they are using 128k MP3s for those lower-quality songs that you're hearing, they will sound better on your computer because you're not hearing a super-lossy music file over radio waves. I'm assuming that FM-HD is still lossy.

 

Actually, maybe you should call in and ask. Be prepared to tell them how to find out if they don't know.

Edited March 16, 2015 by TwoCables

[Max2]

Too many variables.  I have some Bluray audio that is very harsh at times. I can turn around and play a 128K Steely Dan song and you would swear it was a FLAC file or Apple lossless.