> (watch out for loudness war, avoid 2000s)
I think the coincidence (in time, not necessarily causal direction) of master quality issues and growth in lossy codecs is probably one reason people get confused by this. People are hearing crappy recordings, listening to it on mp3s, and drawing conclusions.
I think measuring this stuff is tricky because there's so many variables involved, from the master, to the compression (or lack thereof), to the amps, speakers, quantifying perception, etc. I agree with you completely but suspect there's a bit more to it.
Re:Stereo Gear in the 1970s
by jasonwatkinspdx on Thursday November 11, 2021 @01:14AM
(#29184989)
This is very true. Floyd Toole says in his book for a popular audience that with modern equipment, what you're hearing is roughly 1/3rd the speakers, 1/3rd the room, and 1/3rd the production quality of the recording.
Your insight on source quality is very true, and also applicable across all media, from biblical manuscripts to Japanese anime.
Re:Stereo Gear in the 1970s
by mixmastamyk on Wednesday November 10, 2021 @07:57PM
(#29183133)
Yes, it isn't a new idea.
However I see geeks debating file formats ad nauseum, and I did too for many years as well when storage was expensive. But when aiming for best quality, master quality becomes the primary factor.
Rip a shitty 80s mastered CD, rip to wav, flac, etc.
Get a remastered version of the same album (watch out for loudness war, avoid 2000s), and rip 192+ mp3 or 128+ opus, high quality settings.
Compare. I’ve found the new master lossy sounds better than my old flacs, due to the better source.
Still, space is so cheap I’m mostly getting 16-44 or 48k flacs for new stuff these days, the cost of space is under ten dollars and can reencode forever.