Maybe YOU can't hear the difference, but I am an audiophile

>Maybe YOU can't hear the difference, but I am an audiophile.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tTRKFkE32XE
mp3ornot.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

kek

this desu

basically all of

>there is no such thing as better speakers over $100, its just placebo
>my Logitech z294902029910209 has lasted me years and sounds amazing and it was only $25 from walmart
>I can't imagine anything sounding better ;)

+1 my fellow audiophile

youtube.com/watch?v=tTRKFkE32XE

Buying proper speakers makes a difference that much is not bullshit.

LMAO evrytime

itt people who don't know what an audiophile means

topkek

>You can see from the "Measurements" sidebar that I could find no significant effect that the JitterBug had on the analog signals output by three of the DACs I had to hand. Yet with those DACs and others, I heard an improvement in sound quality that I can attribute only to the JitterBug.

what does it mean user

But why buy more expensive speakers when my Logitech sound just fine?
Your move ;)

What are you on about Sup Forums isn't audiophile in the slightest

Do your Logitechs sound just fine or do you just not know any better?

Sup Forums unironically claims that vinyl sounds better than digital audio

pic related, an average Sup Forumstant

Dynamic range, balance, frequency response, resolution and setup acoustics are all placebo
That isn't even true its just better to collect you idiot

They sound good
Nice crisp highs and great bass. I just can't imagine a speaker sounding better ;)

I'm using two forward facing speakers with 1 1/2 inch tweeter and 8 inch speaker. As well as a 10 inch subwoofer. All in a small space. So tell Me how your 4 1 inch tweeters and 4 inch mid are anywhere near my studio monitors?

You ever feel like a faggot for putting emoticons in every one of your posts?

my 2 speakers cost more than your entire setup

Thats not what vinyl fags think, they always fall back on "MUH WARMTH/ MUH ANALOG" or shit like "MUH DYNAMIC RANGE" and they get so pissy when you back up your shit with facts. They tend to respond with "ITS TRUE TO THE RECORDING" and "ITS BETTER THAN SHITTY MP3S" when its been shown that its extremely difficult if not impossible to distinguish a properly coded mp3 and a flac file

Of course he doesn't know any better, he's a poorfag with no proper audio knowledge.

Poorfag.

Pic related it's me.

You know I'm just fucking with you?
Im just posting the shitty replies from people who like Logitech speakers that piss me off

You hate them so much, yet you actively and willingly became them as a "joke"

True, this is not facebook and we are not your fucking crush. Unless you stop acting like a emoticon-using faggot I suggest different website. I have a feeling reddit is the one for you.

The dynamic range on Vinyl is objectively far superior on the majority of modern albums especially hip-hop and rock because they fucking brick wall limit the fuck out of CDs which is impossible on Vinyl

I have Logitech speakers, never heard better.

I just like to point out how stupid and ignorant they sound

hahaha what a retard you spent all that money on those speakers and I am just as happy with the quality from mine

You should probably stop bragging about being poor.

>hip-hop and rock
Not a problem with Type 2 and higher music.
My classical CDs are not overly compressed.

They brick the original digital files and then they record them on Vinyl. The vinyls add noise that simulates dynamic range. Vinyl fidelity is objectively worse.

Man that midrange dip looks nasty.

I agree.

Because you're not a trained listener and you don't care about sound quality.

Vinyl is inferior to digital but sometimes better masters are found on vinyl.

Fun fact: Most audiophile speakers are garbage, studio quality is where it's at.

Its impossible on vinyl, because it has a very limited dynamic range. About 60db or so of dynamic range

Digital has an effective dynamic range of(I think) around 120db

A Dolby S cassette can have a dynamic range of over 90db

But you only see brick walls on shitty mastered albums. Old hip hop from the 90s were extremely well mastered, i have some Houston hip hop albums on cd, and they can reach up to 20db of dynamic range(these are the songs themselves, not the format) and thats pretty good.

I bet Somalian would be pretty happy eating shit. As you and many people are disgusted by shit eating Somalia, so am I, the audio enthusiast, disgusted with people like you using mediocre speakers/headphones without tube AMP and proper DAC. Also this thread should be renamed to /poorfag/ general.

>But you only see brick walls on shitty mastered albums
Which begs the question, why has the music industry gotten worse at mastering albums?
We have digital, we have digital content delivery, but so many albums are poorly mastered.

I take it that this is the poorfag containment thread?

Too bad you brought it up in a discussion about Sup Forums so that shit is irrelevant

*smcaks lips togheter*
UH SO LOUD ON MY BEETS
*turns on Beats™ audio"
[BASS RESPONCE INCREATES]
UH UH THAT THE SHIT MUH NIGGA

at least the somalian isnt retarded enough to pay thousands of dollars for the same piece of shit that you use lmao.
I bet you wouldn't even get 70% on this test:
mp3ornot.com/ (do at least 20 tries for a good sample size) you obnoxious hipster faggot

>Which begs the question, why has the music industry gotten worse at mastering albums
BECAUSE MUH LOUDNESS GETS MOAR PEPLES TO BUY MUH ALBUM

But don't think that a more quite is better than a louder album, it should belong in between and have certain things(like bass) be the loudest thing in a recording

That would phase so badly in that small room and sound like shit lol

>augh, a headset? How gauche. I use a lapel mic, it's much cheaper without that stupid gaymur tax!
>clickity clackity clack click I THINK SOMEONE'S AROUND THAT CORNER click ci clux clack

For you.

Its not even that hard problem is there is only two songs and both are horrible acoustic recordings that sound like shit on that test

based poorfags

>if I can tell the difference, no one can

lmao and i have never spent more than $50 on audio equipment

I got it wrong the first couple of times but I got it after a while of listening to that shitty twang noise
Basing audio quality off human hearing is dumb anyway when you can measure objectively

Isn't it better not to be an audiophile, so that you can enjoy music, even if it's low quality?

on a laptop with a pair of cheap pioneer in ear heafphones. not willing to do more. personally i'm fine with mp3 vbr, but anything less than 192 CBR is shit

>Basing audio quality off human hearing is dumb anyway when you can measure objectively
This.
The human brain (yes, brain, not ears) is not infallible. It can be tricked and it can even insert imagined input.

It matters little to me if what I hear sounds better or worse, but whether it is measurably better or worse.

Means someone who would stick his penis in soundwaves

should i be able to tell the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps mp3s if im using shitty unresearched £20 headphones i bought years ago?

Yes.

>Dynamic range, balance, frequency response, resolution and setup acoustics are all placebo
No they're not, you idiot. They matter, but not in the way audiofools think they matter.

That site literally plays the same sample 3 times.

>>>/Trash/

That has to be the worst demo room I've ever seen.

The difference between 320kbps and 128 isn't as apparent as most people think it is.

No definitely not.
They have no idea how audio works at all.
They have good tastes in music imho. Some of it is a bit outlandish though.

This they do, which I do not really understand why they shill LP's so much. Sure the sound is a bit warmer and brighter and sometimes there are some decent masters found on LP's. However, from an audio engineering and mastering standpoint LP's are terrible compared to good masters in SACD or other formats.

Source: I browse Sup Forums occasionally and know a femanon who browses Sup Forums very often.

It sticks out massively when I'm watching films

>320kbps vs 128kbps
>not superior V0 MP3
Woah so this is the power...of listening to music on youtube.

...

...

...

...

pls no

>been shopping for new speakers recently
>my hearing is not all that refined but sensitive
>flat or metallic sound somehow manages to physically mess with me
>went to the store, listened to all simple set of 2 speakers+subwoofer they have
>bought the one that sounded the most "right"
>use it half a day
>voices sound flatter
>listening to music suddenly gives me ear aches over time

I CAN'T EVEN HEAR MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE
BUT THE NEW ONES FUCK ME UP
I am forced into semi-audiophile territory to make sure I don't hurt myself because I clearly have no idea what I'm doing.

Super tasters at least exist

is he having an orgasm or a stroke?

Here are my results I took with my iDAC2 and Fidelio X2's

I may try again with the crack and hd600's later

Depends on the quality of the master, the quality of the rip, and the quality of the playback devices.
Some guy probably does a real shitty job and compression or ripping audio when you watch your films.
Plus, aren't most films in 6 channel DTS or other multichannel Blu-Ray audio formats?

know your enemy...

Oh and the website title is misleading
It is all in an mp3 codec kek

why cant i?

>Blind test? Sure, let me open my spectrum analyzer first

Have you listened to Deth Magnetic by Metallica? They even have audible clipping on their CD because they cranked up the loudness all the way beyond max. There's no dynamic range whatsoever, of course it matters, you dip.

I like this edit.

I only regret not having a picture of those audio pebbles.

as an ignorant user what am I looking at that is bad in those pictures

>cant handle people can easily tell the difference between a proper encode and his shitty youtubetomp3 since he isn't on what.cd

If you can't abx v2 and v0 you should off yourself

>but all mp3s are missing auper high frequencies
*posts shitty 320kbps encode that cuts off at 15khz*
>HA, TAKE THAT. Now I'm off to listen to my superior weeaboo music in FLAC.

audiophile here you can here the difference spent about 10k on my setup

haha i see this for the first time. thanks man

I literally work as an audio engineer. If I couldn't tell the difference, I wouldn't be able to earn a living.

How are you enjoying the HTC 10 my fellow audiophiles?

Still using whatever the hell Chinese speakers came with me Gateway DX4200-09 when it was new, sound great to me. Still using the built in speakers in my HP vs17e, sound great too. Still using the single mono speaker built into my Compaq Evo D500 and 510SFF, sounds great. Still using my Sony MDR-ZX100 I got from my grandparents years back, sound great too.

What's the point then? It's not like you're making audio for dogs. Anything outside the human range of hearing is essentially a waste of time.

THICC

I think it's pretty much agreed (except for audiophiles) that, to a point, the more you spend, the more you run into the law of diminishing returns and it becomes less about actual audio quality and more about aesthetic.

I own a pair of PL200's and I've heard premium flagship stuff from MA and KEF and while it was great, it honestly wasn't worth the extra for it, even if I had the money at my disposal. Going from a shitty headset, a pair of harman kardon computer speakers to my MA's was like night and day. Considering how much I use them and enjoy working with music, it was totally worth it.

At the convention I went to, they seemed to really be more focused about cabinet materials, artistry, and shiny glossy paint rather than the driver technology and component design.

you can only tell the difference from shitty mp3's and lossless on higher quality speakers and head units. I never thought there was a difference until I bought my network receiver setup. lossless is the only way to go for me from now on.

heh, twas me.

Just processing tunes on my t420.

v0 is just a variable bitrate setting that targets around 256kbps. It isn't superior to 320kbps aside from lower file sizes and it cuts off sooner than 320kbit does.

Audiophiles have the highest form of autism known to man!

Xd wasting money is cool *tips fedora* *reloads reddit*

and somehow have the most money

>Buy vinyl
>Fun novelty
>If you don't buy shitty pressings it does actually sound good on a good table
>Value of collection can appreciate like fucking crazy.

Why the salt.

and why cant a 24 bit per sample 128khz digital file record those features?

A bunch of placebo cables that people advertise as "improve sound quality" and such, and sell them for a few grands.