Freed At Last From Patents, Does Anyone Still Care About MP3?
-
IIRC that era of iPods had issues with their preamps. I remember when I switched from a Nano to a classic that there was noticeable clipping and other distortion where there wasn't before. I would have returned it but I had already sold my Nano...
-
-
-
-
I thought so too, but once I got IEMs. The drums felt more organic and I heard parts of guitars that I didn't on mp3.
-
Ye, when outdoors in my wireless headphones, I won't even hear the difference.
-
-
-
Aren't there unofficial extensions to mp3 for gappless playback? IIRC you can tag tracks as gappless and many audio players will make them so.
-
I would guess that at least part of the issue there is also that the data isn't all that useful unless it's also exported to some format that other software can read. That format may not capture everything that the native format stores.
In another comment in this thread, I was reading the article on Adobe Creative Cloud, which commented on the fact that the format is proprietary. I can set up some "data storage service", and maybe Adobe lets users export their Creative Cloud data there. Maybe users even have local storage.
But...then, what do you do with the data? Suppose I just get a copy of the native format. If nothing other than the software on Adobe's servers can use it, that doesn't help me at all. Maybe you can export the data, export to an open format like a PNG or something, but you probably don't retain everything. Like, I can maybe get my final image out, but I don't get all the project workflow stuff associated with the work I've done. Macros, brushes, stuff broken up into layers, undo history...
I mean, you have to have the ability to use the software to maintain full use of the data, and Adobe's not going to give you that.
-
-
I don't use any one format. No idea what audio formats I have but probably a lot. Never cared, VLC takes them all.
-
Oh, yeah, not saying that they were the first filesystems, just that I can remember that transition on the personal computer.
-
-
Vinyl is lossy in that any dust or scratches on the record can be heard in the output, so this is only true if you've got an absolutely pristine vinyl.
-
PNG is really designed for images that are either flat color or use an ordered dither. I mean, we do use it for photographs because it's everywhere and lossless, but it was never really intended to compress photographs well.
There are formats that do aim for that, like lossless JPEG and one of the WebP variants.
TIFF also has some utility in that it's got some sort of hierarchical variant that's useful for efficiently dealing with extremely-large images, where software that deals with most other formats really falls over.
But none of those are as universally-available.
Also, I suppose that if you have a PNG image, you know that -- well, absent something like color reduction -- it was losslessly-compressed, whereas all of the above have lossless and lossy variants.
-
All people. 320kbps mp3 is completely audibly transparent under all normal listening conditions. It's a low-tier audiophile meme to claim otherwise but they will never pass a double-blind test.
-
Definitely not.
-
The original idea behind the superiority of vinyl was that the ambient audio was being recorded directly to the media. Of course, this wasn't even true when it was first made, as they were using magnetic tape by then to record in analog. However, there is still some merit to the idea that an infinitesimal amount of quality is lost when translating sound waves to digital data.
Most of the actual differences between cd and vinyl, though, can be chalked up to the loudness wars ruining the mixes on cd.
-
No, they're not sure. You're correct.
