Audiophile or Audio-Fooled? How Good Are Your Ears?

  • Опубликовано: 13 окт 2017
  • In this video, we explore the differences between MP3s, WAV, FLAC (lossless), AAC and whether you can tell the difference? or if it even matters? Discussion on mixing, listening, monitors and audion file formats.
    Listening test:
    Mastering Modes of the Major Scale Video Course:
    The new all-PDF Mega Bundle! Get it here:
    My Links to Follow:
    RU-clip -
    Artist Facebook
    Personal Facebook -
    Instagram -
    Follow On Twitter - @rickbeato
  • ВидеоклипыВидеоклипы

Комментарии • 6 648

  • YourNickIsTaken
    YourNickIsTaken Час назад +1

    Test the mp3 with cymbal sounds. 128kbps destroys cymbal sounds.

    • Rick Beato
      Rick Beato  8 минут назад

      OK, send me your six out of six screenshot we’ll see how you do. Just take the test that’s in the video. You should be able to do it to three times a row with no mistakes right? You know I’ve never gotten one from someone making the same claims that you are never, never. Oh, it does this it does that it’s so easy to here in the symbols blah blah blah. Baloney. Show me the results. Email me with your six out of six and put your name from RU-clip in there. I know you won’t because everyone I’ve asked to do that has never sent me one.

    • YourNickIsTaken
      YourNickIsTaken Час назад

      If you make a test with electronic music "quality" you are cheating.
      If you make a test with a good headphone but you are using shitty audio drivers and soundcard, you are cheating.
      If you are making 44.1kHz WAVE from a 128kbps mp3 - that's already ruined and it's cheating.
      There are so many factors to that test it is not even worth mention science and that test in a same paragraph.
      I hear the difference between a winamp and a foobar2000 player. Even that is a grate influence on the quality. My $1800 HP laptop has B&O soundcard and it's pure garbage. I love Harman and their dedication to the sound quality, but this laptop destroys sound on such level, that is insulting.
      So there are more factors to this.
      Listen punk music (they using a lot of cymbals) on 128kbps and you will hear the distortion generated by the compression.

  • David Hoover
    David Hoover Час назад

    I'll tell you what when I'm mixing on some good studio monitors at 24 bit 48kHz, then I go down to CD quality and then to 320kbps mp3's, there is a difference. I have to work the mix and compression in mastering to bring out background items that disappear because I'd like people to hear it.

  • musamor75
    musamor75 2 часа назад

    You know what Rick, I truly believe that Music (I ALWAYS use a capital) is a sound/emotion experience, and that technical props are totally superfluous. I had a musicologist friend in Montreal forty years ago who could READ LP's, before even playing them! Mahler's Fifth by Sir George Sciolti, etc. He played the scratchy old vinyls on a 50$ turntable. You couldn't catch him out on practically anything (he was basically a hobo type, with a vast amount of knowledge and culture). Music is waves and sounds- some impure. That best thing to do with Music is play it, THEN comes listening. You have to be able to afford superlative equipment. It may enhance the listening experience quite a bit, but the emotion comes from the player. Bach himself, NEVER ever heard a single work of his played or sung properly; the choir boys at St-Thomas, Leipzig nearly all sung out of tune. He played in cold, damp churches in the North of Germany (not conducive to good organ tuning). Charlie Parker, in the fabulous Massey Hall concert with Dizzy Galespie, 1953, ended up playing on a white PLASTIC saxophone, because his alto was in pound (drug money). You CAN'T hear the difference. We're losing touch with all this blasted technology (I'm an old boy living in Europe, having practised a traditional craft, but also have played the squeezebox for over fifty years). I'm lucky enough to possess the two finest instruments around. It's all about sound. Thanks a million Rick, I'm learning a lot from you, and am pretty well hooked on your channel. You have some great harmonic and melodic ideas. I think you're one of the brightest individuals around, ANYWHERE. Your son, Dylan, is mind blowing with his ears!! All the best from France. Au revoir et merci beaucoup.

  • Pelger
    Pelger 7 часов назад

    if you can't hear the difference between 128kbps mp3 and 320kbps or the CD, you are deaf.

  • Davy T
    Davy T 14 часов назад

    instead of getting all excited about different numbers like 128 against 320 or different terms like kbps against WAV. Just enjoy what you hear, isn't that enough???

  • III
    III 17 часов назад

    Perfectly explained, thank you! Also, our hearing habits are used to the stuff by the “old guys“, who apparently mix everything.

  • Lemu Huan
    Lemu Huan 19 часов назад

    What people don't realize is that its also dependant on what the headphones do with the extra information in the alternate compressions.

    If you listen to listen to FLAC vs MP3 vs Wav on STAX, you'd tell much clearer than the headphones she uses

  • TheEnzoferrari12345
    TheEnzoferrari12345 День назад

    whatever microphone you re using, it s out of this world

  • opentrunks
    opentrunks День назад +1

    I'd like to see a test of 10 supposed audiophiles listening to vinyl vs digital

  • Un Pinche Pug
    Un Pinche Pug День назад

    got 3 correct, I used a beyerdynamic 770 pro 80 ohm

  • Alex
    Alex День назад

    i only listen to live music. recordings are for kids

  • Retire Soon
    Retire Soon День назад

    I must be the odd man out because I can hear over 16K and I am 59. Many electronic devices emit a high frequency sound that drives me nuts.

  • Валентин Олександрович Добровінський

    Michelle have done it perfectly!

  • Alberto Velandia
    Alberto Velandia День назад

    I totally disagree, the best way to hear the difference is to take a WAV and an MP3 version invert the phase on the MP3 and add it to the WAV and hear what you are missing for yourself, there is CLEARLY a difference if you conduct this experiment, and it depends on the song, @rick maybe your songs don't need a WAV version but assuming that 320 MP3 are indistinguishable from WAV files is totally wrong

  • adil rizki
    adil rizki День назад +1

    hahaha dude you say if someone can tell the difference between 320k mp3 and a wav don't believe him Dude you are so arrogant . i do hear the difference turn up the volume listen to the drums to the details . sometimes man you are just i don't know i can't find a word to describe it . ill help you record guitar export the file then compress it to mp3 , do the same and keep it aiff or wav and listen . unless you are deff .

  • Akash M Lal
    Akash M Lal 2 дня назад

    Sometimes it isn't just the quality, people get a weird satisfaction hearing the song from a thousand dollar earphone connected to a ridiculously expensive DAC,playing a wav file or flac.

  • VF H
    VF H 2 дня назад

    Nice video

  • José Quiroga
    José Quiroga 2 дня назад +7

    I got all of them,
    My secret: very bad internet speed

  • Satanicuslupis
    Satanicuslupis 2 дня назад +1

    @Rick Beato
    So do the headphones come into play here? If you were someone with a large personal studio or theater room would this then begin to make more of a difference? I've noticed that i often can't really hear much difference between my 256kbps and FLAC (~700+ kbps) files until I really crank it up. Then again maybe I'm just imagining it.

  • Skiddzie
    Skiddzie 2 дня назад +1

    why is she listening on headphones instead of monitors?

  • Keith Watling
    Keith Watling 2 дня назад

    interesting. thanks

  • Alex Park
    Alex Park 2 дня назад

    Get outta here with that 44.1 KHz lmao

  • TheMooseAider
    TheMooseAider 2 дня назад +1

    just as a point, a simplified explanation of the reason speakers are rated up to 50kHz+ is that above a speakers maximum frequency, it will begin will break up and distort. This distortion is at frequencies *way* above the limits of human hearing, however, it produces harmonics of the distortion *within* the audible frequency range (ie below 20kHz).

    Pushing the breakdown frequency higher reduces the level of the audible distortion that occurs within the audble range, by shifing everything further away from the audible range, so any harmonics in the audible range are much lower order (and therefore smaller).

    Ampifiers will give out noise above the human hearing range, right the way up to very high frequencies, hence speaker manufacturers try and design speakers that won't distort until as higher frequency as they reasonably can.

  • Caleb Hohneke
    Caleb Hohneke 2 дня назад

    I think it has a lot to do with familiarity to sounds. I got half of them right...but they were the songs that had more isolated sounds that you can distinguish from the mix to pick out the clarity. At lower rates, there is more compression of the dynamic can hear it. The lows and higher frequencies sound more "squashed". But like I said, familiarity to the sounds is key...Your ears becoming trained to the frequencies/dynamics being thrown at you. I can spend a couple hours on a mix, get use to the sounds, and be able to pick out the WAV and MP3 file differences like that. It's really hard to distinguish from samples as there isn't enough time to let your ears adjust fully imo. Cool video idea. :)

  • Omar Sade
    Omar Sade 2 дня назад

    Great video pal. As a House DJ for 20 odd years i would say on a loud club PA system a WAV would out perform your basic MP3's, it becomes very clear the louder you go especially with the thumps on the bass kicks and the overall punchiness of the track, i cant always tell that while i'm mixing with my headphones but i notice it on the dance-floor its super obvious MP3's sound flat in comparison.

  • anish ashok
    anish ashok 2 дня назад

    Well my personal preference to maintain audio quality but also reduced file size is to convert my FLAC's to 512 Kbps AAC files - Not MP3 as they seem a tad lower in terms of dynamic range(I know even 320Kbps is enough), which is basically the best of both worlds.

  • Paulo Fonseca
    Paulo Fonseca 3 дня назад

    During my DJ and Radio years I tried this test with friends that said they can tell the difference. They simply couldn’t.
    I found out that, for me a 192kbps mp3 is the best compromise between good sound quality and the resulting file size. I’m almost 52 years old and it sounds amazing with my in-ears UE 18+ PRO. Even tried to compare the 320 kbps versions available on iTunes as opposed to my 192’s on my iPhone’s library and in 90% cannot tell the difference.
    Love your channel @Rick Beato. Please keep those “What makes this song great?”. Even though I’m not a musician, as a music lover, it’s amazing to learn what musicians and technicians did that made that tune sound so amazing.

  • Peter Rabin
    Peter Rabin 3 дня назад

    If you have a decent set up you can tell the difference between flac , DSD . In addition the more I listen to MQA the more I see it as a game changer . I don’t listen to MP3 or apples lossless codec

  • Robert Reese
    Robert Reese 3 дня назад

    I enjoyed this. Please do a comparison between analog and digital recording. I personally prefer listening to analog. So maybe I'm just fooling myself.

  • OlafttheGreat1998
    OlafttheGreat1998 3 дня назад


  • Stanley Scalf
    Stanley Scalf 3 дня назад

    I got 4 out of 6 using my mid-range AS-10s. The ones I mistaken the 320 for the uncompressed. I've done this test before on a really good DAC and a pair of Sennheiser with the same results. At best I think maybe there is a REAL difference between the 128k and the rest but unless your a 4 year old audio savant with the best audio setup on the planet there really is no real difference between 320k and better audio recordings.

  • William Dumas
    William Dumas 3 дня назад

    I think AAC is far superior to mp3. It's a shame it's never caught on more.

  • Shadan Rikan
    Shadan Rikan 3 дня назад +1

    the 1/10 information is just false, mp3 like all other codecs uses lot of lossless compression tools to compress data without lossess, also is not only a bandwidth cutting stuff, many techniques are used to get less distortions on sensible sounds or parts, discarding precision on masked or less perceptible sounds.
    Anyway that test is flawed by the mp3 encoder used, a proprietary one from jriver, setted as CBR (VBR is way better) with a cutoff frequency of 16,1kHz, while ie LAME for 128kbps uses 17kHz.
    4/6 is pretty low assuming 3/6 will make mp3 indistinguishable from pcm.

  • Just Watchin Vids 420ahuigharghafjjakjh

    2.5k butthurt people that can't stand the fact that they'll have to find another "super power" to brag about so they can still feel better about not having an actual talent or skill.

  • scubapig
    scubapig 3 дня назад

    I'd be interested to know how many times Michelle ran that test. I think you need to run it 10 times or so to help eliminate guessing. Anyway, she'd do a lot better than me. I kept choosing 128 mp3!

  • Jason McMillan
    Jason McMillan 4 дня назад

    I'm not sure exactly why, my best guess is I haven't heard proper good quality digital audio files before, but CD's always sound better to me. Without doubt the files on my computer that are ripped from my CD collection sound WAAYYYY better than my directly downloaded music files.

  • Dale Thelander
    Dale Thelander 4 дня назад

    And what if you're mixing with Ultrasone PRO 550 headphones?

  • rllamoso
    rllamoso 4 дня назад

    Use the right equipment and you will notice the difference.

  • Larry Dillon
    Larry Dillon 4 дня назад +1

    Excellent presentation, Rick.

  • gaz tommy
    gaz tommy 4 дня назад +1

    When i was 17 (a long time ago now) all my music was played on a "Dansette" record player, because that was all i had and totally enjoyed the music of every song i ever played.
    As time has moved on i find my time taken up with,dac,s, bitrates, interconnects, etc,etc,etc
    Technology has diluted all thoughts away from what should have been the main reason for its enjoyment in the first place the MUSIC.
    I think sometimes i should ditch the lot and go back to what gave me the best listening pleasure of my life.........
    Just a thought, sometimes enough is never enough...

  • Brian Bishop
    Brian Bishop 4 дня назад

    You realize that, no matter what it started as, after you uploaded it, all of this audio was then re-encoded by whavever codec RU-clip uses, right? So you can't "prove" anything by listening to a RU-clip video?

    • Rick Beato
      Rick Beato  4 дня назад

      My god, she’s not listening off RU-clip dummy. I have the link in the description from NPR.

  • K L
    K L 4 дня назад

    Dogs have better hearing than humans.

    • scubapig
      scubapig 3 дня назад

      True, but I'm struggling to name an album mixed by a dog.

  • Circlemover
    Circlemover 5 дней назад +1

    Dude I am really surprised at you. Firstly, your test was undertaken using headphones listening in the audio near field. Its impossible to tell the difference in digital detail listening in the true near field audio range. This one of the reasons why the MP3 format is a successful. Amp it up using 10 kW rig and you will definitely hear a difference in the audio quality. MP3 file format compression does not even come close to CD standard. Its tissue thin and the bottom end is glassy. Also what really narks me is how you describe your test subject as having perfect pitch? what the hell that has to do with anything? as if this is some kind of qualification? she has perfect pitch so what. In any case the concept of perfect pitch in humans does not exist dude. Fake news? Blimey mate you can do much better than this to promote your stuff.

    • Circlemover
      Circlemover 4 дня назад

      +Rick Beato Well rick you don't have to apologise to me..I'm and old dog at this game as well. Pitch color? name that frequency? give me a break . I would like to see her try... Ya see rick, the clue is in the word compression. Which means - in the case of MP3 format - bits have been removed...and as you demonstrate something like 9 tenths of the have been bitten off. Its a very neat trick indeed. Bang goes your dynamics right there. Plus your top end plus your bottom end. Amp it up...and push some air from the its chalk and cheese time. Now that's black and white using your 'pitch color' nonsense. Your don't need a weather man to tell you which way the wind blows. And you certainly don't need pitch perfect ears to hear MP3 losses either ...ordinary ones are just fine.

    • John Bishop
      John Bishop 4 дня назад

      +Rick Beato "has more awareness of pitch color since she recognizes exact frequencies and is able to name them" -- does not follow, sorry bro

    • Rick Beato
      Rick Beato  4 дня назад

      Why does perfect pitch matter? Because she has more awareness of pitch color since she recognizes exact frequencies and is able to name them. The fact that you don’t realize that shows that you’re not actually thinking rationally. Sorry bro.

  • Code5 Prototypes
    Code5 Prototypes 5 дней назад

    That's exactly what a vampire would say...

  • Thomas Yorkeshire
    Thomas Yorkeshire 5 дней назад

    it really depends on the song, most modern pop songs use alot of compression, and are mixed to sound loud, whereas the difference between something in 320kbps and 24 bit flac by a band like radiohead for example is very noticable

  • Inception Beatz
    Inception Beatz 5 дней назад +3

    Very interesting points here & I liked the variety of recorded music in the test. I managed to get 6 out of 6 quite easily, but I certainly wouldn't be going around calling myself an audiophile. When I'm out & about mp3's are great, but when at home sitting back & just enjoying an Album. My preference is mostly CD & some vinyl depending on what genre or release date I'm listening to. But I think that's the main point right? At the end of the day, people enjoying & appreciating music regardless of the format or genre.

  • Jo Cool
    Jo Cool 5 дней назад

    Indeed the Yamaha monitors are crappy. Abbey Road Studios has had B&W series speakers for decades.

    • Circlemover
      Circlemover 5 дней назад

      Dude I have worked in Abbey Road and I can tell you - all the monitors are crap just like most monitors.

  • Jos Menhart
    Jos Menhart 5 дней назад

    I would like to turn it around: If the people who are mixing the record can't hear things above say, 15K, wouldn't they just low pass everything beneath that? Meaning: your wav, your 128 and 320 bitrate wouldn't matter because you would be listening to old people's hearing anyway. No wonder no-one can hear the difference between the formats, as there is none. Maybe we would need someone with the experience of those master producers and the hearing of a 10 year old, then I am fairly sure we could hear the difference between the formats ;)

  • Trevis Robotie
    Trevis Robotie 6 дней назад

    i don't understand batsht but i believe you-lol

  • Erik Aleksander Moe
    Erik Aleksander Moe 6 дней назад +2

    I may be totalt wrong but I hear definitely the difference. But it is more about the ambiance and the detail. When I listen to a lossy sound file for longer periods of time I feel like I'm listening to the music standing too closely to the musicians. The sound doesn't have time to breath. This is especially true in complex music that requires lots of dynamic range. On lossy files I can also sometimes hear the clipping in the frequency range. I mainly listen to older music. Music nowadays are mixed terribly with extremely low dynamic range and sampled way too high. This is why a person cannot hear the difference in new music.
    Listening Madonna's Holiday or The Doors' The End and you will hear so many small details on the lossless versions. The punch in symbals in Holiday, the guitar in the beginning of The End. Magnificent in lossless. Just two examples though but if you know what to listen for you can definitely hear the difference.

    • Sillyhatday
      Sillyhatday 4 дня назад

      I always pick up on the high frequencies sounding horrible, more pronounced on low bit rate MP3. Such as you say, on older records that have a lot more dynamics you can hear subtle sounds that you'd never miss unless you heard a higher quality version. I'm not that old now but I can't hear past about 13k, so it makes less of a difference. It's nice to know you have a top quality recording, even if you can't hear the difference. High quality to me is just CD audio ripped to FLAC. Anything past that is wankery

  • Jon Skelton
    Jon Skelton 6 дней назад

    I got 4 out of 6.
    I missed the pianist and ColdPlay

  • P M
    P M 6 дней назад

    no difference between the 320 and the 128 mp3?

  • MicroChirp
    MicroChirp 6 дней назад

    Got 4 out of 6 because the loud pop records are the easiest to tell, what with all the high frequency content in them.

  • Dalton
    Dalton 7 дней назад

    Would be nice if you placed your entire setup specs in the video and not just the headphones (Sound card vs motherboard sound vs USB external, and the DAC and AMP on said system). Sound circuits can more than cover the difference from high quality lossy MP3 and lossless if they are not perfect. That and it's possible that the MP3 due to psycho-acoustics would sound subjectively more pleasing especially if you do the test without first hearing the lossless file, essentially it could be coloring the sound in a way that people subjectively like kind of like how some people like the way a tube headphone amp colors the music.

  • Mike P
    Mike P 7 дней назад

    I can't tell the difference. I usually will buy iTunes version if I just want one or two songs. If I want the whole album I get the CD and rip it myself.

  • Brazda25
    Brazda25 7 дней назад

    If you can’t tell 128 kbps you got a problem

  • Roy Batty
    Roy Batty 7 дней назад

    I scored 5/6.. my miss was the one 320 yeah me!!
    surprising, i'm 54 and have heard a lot of loud in my time...
    I dont have perfect pitch, but i do have perfect pitch recall FWIW

  • K. Nakanishi
    K. Nakanishi 7 дней назад +8

    I genuinely just prefer to own the CD - physical copy, plus I rip it in uncompressed AIFF. Just so I know, for sure, this is how it's intended to sound.

    • Alex
      Alex День назад

      but if you have to rip it yourself in order to know what it should sound like, it means you are not able to tell whether they sound right or not just by listening

  • ShieldArc200
    ShieldArc200 7 дней назад

    Digital sound just sucks...

  • Paulo Bonito
    Paulo Bonito 8 дней назад

    I can totally tell the difference between MP3 320 and WAV. Since you're indirectly calling me a liar, I would like to prove it to you and to the world, bring it on...
    I also believe that even tough you don't notice the subtle differences, your body can unconsciously "feel" them.
    (I'm 36 with ruined ears and I'm not an audio engineer neither audiophile)
    BTW I also can detect difference from 120hz to 144hz display monitors and PWM flickering.
    I guess I'm just an extremely sensitive guy

  • The Hermit
    The Hermit 8 дней назад

    Well that settles that. I could barely hear what she was listening to, and I got most of them right... easily. Wow. But what's interesting about this debate is that you can never actually 'prove' something 'sounds better'. Guitarists used to take razor blades to their speakers because it 'sounded better'. And the 'warmth' of the vinyl LP is a REAL thing... though the numbers are lower (less information). But that information is delivered WITHOUT holes cut in it (digitization). It's 'curvy'... but then we make it jagged. I believe we can sense these subtle differences... if only on somewhat of a subconscious level.

    • The Hermit
      The Hermit 6 дней назад

      +koningskeizer And I'll remind everyone the only reason you are here is that you think that, if you can't hear something, nobody else can either. You're like a musical ostrich!

    • The Hermit
      The Hermit 6 дней назад

      +koningskeizer You're the one he keeps coming back for more, aren't you? My bet's on making a fool of you.

    • koningskeizer
      koningskeizer 6 дней назад

      The Hermit Hahaha, dude. Just stop already. You’re making an even greater fool of yourself then you already were.

    • The Hermit
      The Hermit 6 дней назад

      +koningskeizer But yes. That's EXACTLY what I was saying about the ones I listened to: it was EASY. Sorry you're having difficulty.

    • The Hermit
      The Hermit 6 дней назад

      +koningskeizer Glad you were impressed but that really wasn't the point. It's sad that you have so little self confidence that it freaks you out when someone displays a little knowledge, ability, understanding, or even curiosity.

  • m. o.
    m. o. 8 дней назад +3

    How good are your ears? Better than yours ! 😎

  • Carlos Cli
    Carlos Cli 8 дней назад

    Excellent analysis. This will stop many absurd discussions with some stubborn audiophiles. Thank you for posting it. Congratulations

  • mropeel
    mropeel 8 дней назад

    I know I'm deaf ... If I have a shaker on my left speaker, just sitting in the mix, I cant hear it. I have to keep checking in MONO to hear if it's still there. So it does worry me that I'm missing high frequencies other people can hear that are making my mixes sound horrible.... strangely no one has complained yet ... maybe they are all deaf too ... haha

  • Ryan Martin
    Ryan Martin 8 дней назад

    Now I understand why all music is mixed too loud these days. All these old guys have to crank up each frequency :P
    But seriously though, tell me who mixed Radiohead and Alabama Shakes.

  • Corey Malis
    Corey Malis 8 дней назад

    The bottom line is what was the original recording recorded in? Bit depth (dynamic range) over sampling rate is the only thing noticeable to the ears. The fact is 24 bit does sound better than a 16 bit transfer of the master tape only when the dynamic range wasn’t snipped to begin with. Perfect example is Why by Ginger Baker. the 24 bit release has more power (oomph) than the 16 bit release which are both 44.1K sampling. Again, depends on the format of the master. As for the extreme sampling rate it is nice to attempt the best digital transfer of the analog master tape but that is the only thing all that data is good for. MP3 is not PCM and like DSD the numbers can not be compared. I'll always prefer the quality that is closest or equal to the master (whatever that may be).

  • Tomas Dabašinskas
    Tomas Dabašinskas 9 дней назад

    Ok, migrating from Catholicism to whatever you're into, Rick. Really enjoying your lessons. Thanks!

  • Adam Mihalyi
    Adam Mihalyi 9 дней назад

    4/6 is perfectly consistent with fifty-fifty chance. You should do more tests to get any meaningful results. After only six attempts the errors (uncertainties) are huge. All you can say for now is that she can tell the difference between 128 and the other two.

    • Adam Mihalyi
      Adam Mihalyi 6 дней назад

      +Philippe Buraud Yes, I meant 50/50 between the two contentious options. The 128 kbps MP3 is the odd one out, but even I could tell that one from the other two. For an experiment like this, where you can use Poisson distribution as a model (see e.g. Durham University's article on Poisson Distribution), the standard error (uncertainty) should be the square root of the count, so the results were actually 4 +/- 2, and 2 +/- 1.4. These are both consistent with choosing between these two options randomly (3, and 3 are both within the error bars).

    • Philippe Buraud
      Philippe Buraud 6 дней назад

      The were 3 choices, so the random chances is one/third not fifithy/fifthy.

  • Warren Zoell
    Warren Zoell 9 дней назад

    This video is pointless if the viewer can't hear them as well. Thumbs down.

  • MaqueGenio
    MaqueGenio 9 дней назад

    This is what ive been thinking all along. FLAC is overrated AF. Just stick with m4a, ogg 160kbs and you will be fine.

  • TomNeil A
    TomNeil A 9 дней назад

    I'm a Stereophile not an audiophile.

  • Yotam Cohen
    Yotam Cohen 9 дней назад

    Well Rick I learned something new. Apparently MP3 is not inferior to Wave... Rick wears his mythbusters suit. Also, if Beato is your real last name, dude ... that's like soo convenient, BEATo - you were made to be a musician XD

  • Andreas Lossius
    Andreas Lossius 9 дней назад

    And are you shure the equipment headphones, amps, speakers etc can play back the high pich? I for shure have speakers that can and others that cant. Most speakers stop at 20 kHz. Others over 50 kHz. Edited: I have done sone reserch, i actually dont think those headphones can play higher than 20 to 23 kHz. She has an impossible task.

  • Lee Bee
    Lee Bee 9 дней назад

    Great video, and great conclusion :) A few years ago I did some double-blind tests and realized that I can hear the difference between mp3 and WAV, so I switched to encoding with flac, just to be safe. But like you say, it doesn't really matter, all that really matters is how good the music sounds. If you know how much quality is _deliberately_ lost during the production process, you care a lot less about the final file format :D

  • Andyw1228
    Andyw1228 9 дней назад

    Sadly these audiofools don't "believe" science or facts in this matter. This is often the case with someone who "believes" (creationists rather believe in an old book written and assembled by dozens of ancient clueless people). In this casse its even worse, because there is scientific proof and physical rules and low frequency science is rather simple withot skin effect and so on. The more money these people have the more they believe in BS- why is that ? There are studio and producing legends and companies who tell them lies and when one wants to enlighten them they sometimes get angry....

  • clayton jackson
    clayton jackson 9 дней назад

    Good points, but....The test was too short, no one listens to music like that..Over time you would hear the quality or degradation of various instruments in a regular track.

  • Matinee Martyr
    Matinee Martyr 9 дней назад +4

    I was played 8 tracks in MP3 320k & CD, and picked everyone out. At the time I was told no one had got all of them right. The music was classical and the differences for me lay in the reverberation and room sound. The test was set up by a seller of audiophile gear, I'm not sure what this says about your test.

    • Sam Firth
      Sam Firth 5 дней назад

      Well, if the dude was trying to sell you something, it tells me you should get someone impartial to test you as well ...

  • Oliver
    Oliver 9 дней назад

    Got 6/6 with Samsung in-ear headphones. No perfect pitch to help me out, but still I find that you can pick out richer textures in the uncompressed files. Hard to explain. Then again I don't feel like the difference between the sound qualities entices me to pay for a service like Tidal that offers .wav file streaming. Seems like a waste.

  • Spacious Sounds
    Spacious Sounds 9 дней назад

    So, do you see Tidal as a pointless service?

  • Bat Masterson
    Bat Masterson 9 дней назад +6

    well I was born in 1937 and I can't hear a damn word he talking about I think he said he wants to pee with music I do too.

  • James Ingles
    James Ingles 9 дней назад

    It’s complicated. So many variables it’s nuts, but since most people are listening to poorly mastered, brick-walled pop music on tiny earbuds or bass heavy headphones or Bluetooth or computer speakers ...nope it doesn’t matter. A better bitrate of a track that’s had the dynamics mastered out is pointless. I also say that through earbuds, even great ones, a 256, maybe even 128 kbps fite is going to be just fine for slot of things. But if you have a decent home stereo set up, a compressed file will never match full CD or better quality, never, you can hear the difference if you are really soaking it in. If it’s just playing while you converse or party or whatever it probably doesn’t matter. But again, your equipment, your set up, your source, the mastering, so many things effect whether you can tell or not and listening to a fraction of a track is never going to be a good indicator.

  • Remy Medin
    Remy Medin 10 дней назад

    I’ve blind tested this several times, and it’s very material-dependent. Most times I can’t hear the difference with a quick listen (or even with serious listening), but on some recordings it’s really obvious. Also, when using a sinc-filter it’s easier to tell sometimes, because you can AB it pretty fast.
    In addition to that I can hear a difference when AB-ing 24- and 16-bit files, don’t know why but 16 sounds a bit more like a record to me (sometimes).
    When it comes down to it the difference will be minimal most of the time, but try this with some old blues records or something and it can get quite obvious for some reason ...

  • Nemo
    Nemo 10 дней назад

    Michelle is cute

  • j miller
    j miller 10 дней назад

    You again.

  • Peter Dixon
    Peter Dixon 10 дней назад

    That is a very young looking Murray Perahia. Was this a digital recording of an analogue tape original? This can make a huge difference. I recall running tests on digital copies of old analogue recordings vs DDDs. In the purely digital sound you could hear each individual member of the choir, whereas on the same DDD recording trumpet sounds would break down at the extreme edges. However, with the ADD recordings the sound was more natural and did not break down on the high trumpet notes, etc.

  • Buckaroo Banzai
    Buckaroo Banzai 10 дней назад

    i hear original tunes in my head ..does make me a

  • Buckaroo Banzai
    Buckaroo Banzai 10 дней назад

    audio fileles are fake..makin money for nothing

  • Buckaroo Banzai
    Buckaroo Banzai 10 дней назад

    and she guessed 4 lol

  • Michael Placzek
    Michael Placzek 10 дней назад


  • ThePumpkinBoat MC
    ThePumpkinBoat MC 10 дней назад

    I did this test when I was ten and got a 6/6

  • Musti koirä
    Musti koirä 10 дней назад

    It's totally irrelevant if some pro mixing guys can hear high pitched sound or not, or what kind of speakers they use - as long as they don't start lowpassing anything they can't hear. :) I've also been able to tell wav from 320kbps MP3, in favor to CD quality wav. For some people audiophilism is a hobby about no compromises - just for the sake of it. Why would someone choose version of recording that you know you are missing something that you actually can hear. I listen primarily to vinyl LPs though.

  • J Thorsson
    J Thorsson 10 дней назад +32

    not sure about that but i definitely do here the difference between 128 kbit and 320kbit....

    • StickThisUpYourAnus
      StickThisUpYourAnus День назад

      True, it's most noticeable when there are a lot of clashing sounds like cymbals

  • John Bishop
    John Bishop 10 дней назад

    what's perfect pitch got to do with it

  • John Bishop
    John Bishop 10 дней назад

    I still use the NAD CD player I got in 1996 or 7

  • Peter A432
    Peter A432 10 дней назад

    I feel better,thank you. I was afraid I had damaged my ears standing in front of speakers at maybe 100 DB for decades. That's so unfair anything but my hearing !

  • Glenn Horvath
    Glenn Horvath 10 дней назад

    What do you think of The Shaggs, Philosophy of the World? Could you transcribe Foot Foot

  • nanook
    nanook 10 дней назад

    Rick, I think it could really be great to make a 'how to: home studio' relative to different budgets/musical ambitions (students in first years of music school/production begginners; pros; superpros; etc)... And mention DAW's, soundcards, midi, etc. I don't know, I just feel it would be really helpfull, as in to get the knowledge of someone I can trust. Thank you!

  • Special EDy
    Special EDy 10 дней назад +3

    I got 4/6 with Bose QC-35, but I'm outside and 100 meters from heavy construction...

  • Howard Kleger
    Howard Kleger 10 дней назад

    OK. I've been hedging around the issue for awhile. I don't go to concerts or loud places, in general. Not so much as others, and, when I did, not nearly as much as others. Anyway, I'm wondering and angrily disturbed by how much the attack of high and low frequencies with ambulances and boomblasting expedites the hearing loss. I cover my ears whenever I see an ambulance coming through. Ofcourse, there seems little I can do to avoid bass frequencies; I live in an apartment. I would like to hear what others have to say about this. Also, do you think that something should be done about it? Yes. I make "sound pieces." I avoid headphones to minimize the damage gear, and take complete control for any sounds that I'm responsible for that could damage my hearing. I can sing in a high pitch, but even that hurts my ears.

    • Sam Firth
      Sam Firth 5 дней назад

      I think you need to relax, man. That's what I think.

      Seriously, it might be that you're wired a bit different to other people, but hearing damage is caused by total energy while a passing neenaw might be really loud, the time you're exposed to it is very small, the effect on your hearing mechanism is extremely small.
      Do whatever makes you feel good, but I suggest you're unlikely to be affected by things that we all encounter daily or we'd all be deaf.

  • xAA7
    xAA7 11 дней назад +1

    wow, got the 4/6 she got right as well. wonder why...I think WAV is a bit overkill unless an artist specifically tells you to listen to the highest quality. Listened to a deadmau5 song in wav format that blew me away