[Sonnova]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:45:33 -0800, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ):

Sonnova wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:58:18 -0800, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ):

willbill wrote:
Doug McDonald wrote:

willbill wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:

Hardly anybody buys into the pseudo-science behind those overpriced,
oversold toys. Note that the SACD and DVD-A formats are slowly dying
in the marketplace.


i'm sure that others here know the answer,
but are you a fan of SACD, or not?

again, i'm not trolling! if you think that
SACD has little merit, then what does have merit?



The SACD has great merit because it is multichannel. Many
of the SACDs I have are really really good heard on
my 5-speaker system.

Doug McDonald

1st thanks to you, steve sullivan and sonnova for
your very recent answers in the "impressions" thread

to me, of the "big 3" (read inexpensive, yet very good;
SACD, CD and vinyl), the clear current volume leader
has been and continues to be CD

(i'm discounting mp3 coz what little i know about it
is that it is a compressed sound format (2 channel?),
similar to the compressed DD and DTS multichannel
formats used with DVD movies)

It is, but 1) you may not be able to tell an
mp3 from a lossless source by ear, if the mp3 is well-made and 2) mp3 sales
and popularity *far* outstrip SACD's and vinyl's.

___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason

Depends on the music. I can always tell an MP3 on classical,

Color me skeptical. 'Classical' isn't necessarily harder to
encode than nonclassical music.

Why don't I color you "not thinking about it enough" instead? No, classical
isn't necessarily harder to encode than pop. But because of the much larger
dynamic range of classical music (ppp to fff) it's easier to hear the
artifacts than with pop and rock which tends to run the gamut from ff to fff!
While this isn't always the case with pop, it is with the vast majority of
it. The limited dynamic range (read that LOUD) that most pop music has masks
most of the audible artifacts.

If I could ensure you wouldn't use any wav analysis tricks
to identify the mp3 from source, I'd be happy to test your
hearing on this.

It's not that hard. Believe me, when the dynamic range changes suddenly there
is an accompanying, uncorrolated artifact that is as unmistakable as it is
unpleasant that you cannot miss once you've heard it.

You don't actually think that a lossy compression algorithm could throw
portions of the waveform away without it being noticeable at least
occasionally, do you?