waterskidoo <water.skidoo@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2007-08-19, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> ____/ [H]omer on Saturday 18 August 2007 20:13 : \____
>
>> What is the obsession with loss of quality anyway? The music can always be
>> reproduced from the source (unless the artist passes away). Maybe we
>> should
Roybot demonstrates that he is indeed "not human".
>> also have our TV sets spewing out 500 frames per second. Yeah... that will
>> really make the /perceived/ experience better.
And that he doesn't understand perceptions and FPS theories.
>
> It's not only frequency response that gets killed with poor lossy
> schemes it is the comb effect, distortion, stereo field and a
> whole host of other problems that these schemes cause.
> In addition the style of music aggravates some schemes more than
> others which is why little junior listening to some trance music
> thinks his 128kbps mp3 sounds great but his mother listening to
> a live recording of the Count Basie Big Band thinks 320kbps is
> barely enough.
--
Be sociable. Speak to the person next to you in the unemployment line tomorrow.
|
|