Snap crackle and bop

[hirez]

[FX: Stares into space for a bit. Space stares back.]

The downside with listening to bits of your music-pile with good quality earphones is that you discover just how rubbish 128k MP3s are. I can cope with the noise of old vinyl encoded at 192k, but a lower bitrate sounds much worse. Like an off-azimuth cassette that's been in your car too long. I would wonder if it's down to the encoder, but that way lies oxygen-free copper interconnects.

Comments

[aca.livejournal.com]

Given the amount of data being thrown away in MP3 encoding it's a little harsh to compare it to Hi-Fi man's directional cable obsession. :)

There's a lot to be said for variable bit rate encoding. Bigger files, but only when you need it.

[reddragdiva]

Yeah, it's using the encoder called "MP3." I've been reripping stuff in iTunes on the Mac as the best MP3 VBR I can.

[hirez.livejournal.com]

Perhaps so, but that doesn't stop PCWorld flogging gold-plated ipod connectors to the credulous.

Yus. I habitually crunch stuff at VBR quality=best these days, but there are old files and things encoded by other people.

[aca.livejournal.com]

This is why I rarely download stuff. Most people aren't as fussy as me. :)

[mr-tom.livejournal.com]

There's something strangely pleasing about distortion introduced by analogue recordings that is completely absent from the distortion caused by digital compression. Maybe it's that the former is laden with nostalgic warm-and-fuzzies, but I suspect that it's because the distortions are actually more pleasing.

qv: Blocking on digital cable, rather than hiss and snow on those old tellies with a tuning knob.

[reddragdiva]

Well, yeah. It's also more gradual. Digital noise is more like a pile of sharp broken bits (so to speak).

[drumiller.livejournal.com]

Hrm, this reminds me of K.W. Jeter's *Noir*, where the spinal columns of copyright "infringers" are used to make super-conducting high-fidelity audio cables.

Re-ripping is usually called for, or re-hoovering collections that have been updated. Most of the time I need the external soundtrack, I'm in a noisy enough environment that the earphones can't do much unless I have the Shure's in.

[hirez.livejournal.com]

True.

For maximal fun, try to have a conversation on a 3G link when the codec's had a funny turn. One end or other sounds like what you'd expect a telephone scrambler to do. As distinct from the usual flanging/talking down a drainpipe/all gone a bit SSB failure mode I'm used to.

[easterbunny.livejournal.com]

I find that my tolerance for lo-fi increases proportionally to how much I like the song and how long it's been since I've heard it. A few months ago XFM started a song lovingly associated with the halcyon days of high school nerd camp that I hadn't heard in several years. Alas, I drove behind Box Hill and was forced to sing along doggedly as the song was first besmirched and then entirely replaced by hisses, crackles, static, and finally interception from the Carpenters on Radio Not-Quite-Dead-Yet-In-Eastbourne.

[moral-vacuum.livejournal.com]

I won't go below 192k. 192K sounds doable through my Audiolab amp and Rogers speakers, but if I add my HeadRoom pre-amp in between it sounds wonderful. Honest. All the warmth comes back.

[echo-echo.livejournal.com]

I actually quite like certain artifacts that digital encoding/compression/errors add and actually use them in a musical context.

Ok, so analogue distortion tends to add more musical harmonics but digital can be pretty too. :)

[echo-echo.livejournal.com]

Oh yes. Certain encoders did horrible things at 128kbps. Others were much better. Some encoders could make 128 quite passable, others turned it into an artifact ridden mess.

Though maybe something like Soundsoap might help clean the 128k gremlins up somewhat. http://www.bias-inc.com/products/soundsoappro/

Hard to get back what is lost, but certain things can be improved with harmonic /subharmonic generators, which probably explains why putting it through a nice front end would help.