tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6980672.post115695417898467105..comments2023-10-08T08:38:09.714-04:00Comments on Musical Perceptions: Pod peopleScotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01286095156825716887noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6980672.post-1156979266069659292006-08-30T19:07:00.000-04:002006-08-30T19:07:00.000-04:00The alleged psychoacoustic "redundancies" are not ...The alleged psychoacoustic "redundancies" are not at all redundant at the average bitrates people use. 128kbps mp3 as used by iTMS is very lossy. Personally I can clearly hear the difference between 256kbps mp3 and 1411kbps aiff. But then it depends on what you're playing it through and what you're listening for etc.stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01278867623018533720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6980672.post-1156968518236626282006-08-30T16:08:00.000-04:002006-08-30T16:08:00.000-04:00That is a good point. I've never tried it myself....That is a good point. I've never tried it myself. Theoretically the wavelet transforms used in mp3 compression are lossless, merely removing redundancies. In practice there is loss, though not as much as in some other compression techniques.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01286095156825716887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6980672.post-1156961210628711462006-08-30T14:06:00.000-04:002006-08-30T14:06:00.000-04:00Good points, but if you burn a CD of iTMS music, a...Good points, but if you burn a CD of iTMS music, and then re-rip it to mp3, hasn't the music gone through lossy compression twice? It's gonna sound horrible, though I guess some/many people won't notice.stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01278867623018533720noreply@blogger.com