CDs or MP3s?

no because you actually thought there was a difference between flac and cd audio

There is. One is the actual fucking CD whereas the other is not. There's the difference, and that's the point that I was making.
 
Cds sound more loud clear compressed and low ended so I buy cds. I really do not want to get all fansy and technical trying to find cds in a more closer quality than mp3s. I like artwork,cds,etc.. anyways. I am not satisfied with sitting in my room with cdr's. I like to support bands I enjoy. A lot of these bands do not get huge support anyways. If I was in an underground band would want people to buy the cds. If people do not buy cds than underground labels and bands are going to disapear or not release as many cool things.
 
There is. One is the actual fucking CD whereas the other is not. There's the difference, and that's the point that I was making.

What Erik is getting at is that since FLAC is a lossless audio format the actual audio data that is being played back is completely identical and therefor sounds identical. Same as if you were to rip a CD as .wav files. With mp3's that is not the case, but people who claim they can tell the difference between high quality well encoded (ie. using a good encoder and proper encoding settings) mp3's and uncompressed audio are pretty much delusional. The human hearing is just not accurate enough for that. The whole point of the mp3 encoding algorithms is to exclude and diminish the frequencies that cannot be reliably picked up by human ears. Your dog could probably hear the difference. You can't.

On topic: I would absolutely never pay for an mp3 right now. Buying CDs costs the same and you can rip them into any format you want yourself, plus have something tangible with nice artwork and a booklet. The only way I could see myself buying mp3s is for stuff that I don't really care enough about to spend a lot of money on but I would kind of like high quality mp3s of the songs (which on filesharing services can be a pain sometimes because atleast 50% of the people who use them have no fucking clue how to rip CDs properly). But then the mp3 would have to be A) cheap, B) of a confirmed high quality and C) not contain any DRM bullshit. So in all likelihood, probably not anytime soon.
 
CD. Reasons:-

1) Tactile experience.
2) The physical look of them on my shelving.
3) The smug feeling of knowing I'm not a thieving cunt.
4) Better sound (please do not embroil me in "You can't tell the difference debate")
5) The chase for finding the original CD (sometimes, of course, the chase is better than the catch)
6) I'm too old to like MP3's.
 
What Erik is getting at is that since FLAC is a lossless audio format the actual audio data that is being played back is completely identical and therefor sounds identical. Same as if you were to rip a CD as .wav files. With mp3's that is not the case, but people who claim they can tell the difference between high quality well encoded (ie. using a good encoder and proper encoding settings) mp3's and uncompressed audio are pretty much delusional. The human hearing is just not accurate enough for that. The whole point of the mp3 encoding algorithms is to exclude and diminish the frequencies that cannot be reliably picked up by human ears. Your dog could probably hear the difference. You can't.

I'm aware of this though, because Erik has yelled at me about it before. But it still does not negate what I said.
 
Mention anything to do with digital recording (or, actually, analogue recording) and you'll get Erik to appear, much like a genie. Unlike a genie, he's likely to yell at you, call you a cunt and tell you how you're wrong.

The only three wishes you are likely to make are:

1) I wish I had never mentioned bit rate.
2) I wish I had never said I can tell the difference between CD and FlAC/MP3
3) I wish I could die right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skeptik and enjoi17
I can't see myself buying mp3s unless the price really drops so that it costs less than $5 for an album. $.99 per song is way too much. Perhaps it might be worth it in the case of splits with one shit band, and only 3-4 songs to buy.
 
Listen to an MP3 on a decent stereo system, and compare it to the same CD. Even at the highest bit rate, the CD sounds better. I'm not talking a $300 off the shelf system, I'm talking a $10,000 surround system.

+1

I never understood why people can't tell the difference. And you definitely don't need a 10k system to do that.
 
I never understood why people can't tell the difference. And you definitely don't need a 10k system to do that.

Everyone's ears are different. Some people can't tell the difference, usually either because their ears are untrained and they don't know how to listen for the difference or their ears hear high frequencies differently. Damaged hearing can play a part also. Although my hearing is quite fucked from years of abuse and I can always tell when an mp3 is being played; it sounds clipped and not as crisp as it should.