Scott Dolan

320 MP3 and 256 AAC sound exactly the same in my experience. They are both "lossy" formats. Apple Lossless (ALAC), WAV, and AIFF are all lossless. There is zero difference between any of the three. They are all bit perfect replications. Just as stated in the article you linked to. .m4a is simply the file extension. Kind of like .wav, .com, .pdf, or .mp3. It can appear on both AAC and ALAC files. It's of no consequence, just a simple file extension. Which sounds the best? Well, in theory AAC sounds better than MP3. Though if you're encoding mp3's at 320 vs AAC at 256, it's probably a wash. ALAC, WAV, and AIFF are all completely the same, so you'll hear no difference between any of them. BTW, if it helps, CDs are essentially .wav files. Now, some folks will try to tell you that FLAC/ALAC are compressed, so therefore information has been discarded. That is absolutely, 100% incorrect. Lossless audio is just that, lossless. Think of FLAC/ALAC as CD audio turned into a .zip file. All the information is there, it's just been encoded and catalogued differently to reduce the overall file size. You'll have to experiment and compare for yourself to figure out which one sounds the "best". I personally find no discernible difference in any of them. As you've seen above, some folks will try to convince you they heard differences without offering even a shred of empirical evidence to support their claim. Kind of similar to audio companies who tell you their $1000 per foot speaker cables will magically transform your system and listening experience. But, do your own tests as I did and see what you come up with.

I don't know. A team that should have only won four or five games won 12, along with a wildcard playoff game, over achieved enough to make you think Jerry already made a deal with the devil.

As I said, I'll buy that people can hear it when they present proof. Either way, if you have to listen that hard to hear it, what's the point? Sounds more like straining than it does listening, IMO.

Kinda like you and your incorrect assessment about home studios not being able to rival professional studios. You can always post Foobar results and prove that you have golden ears. I'm not interested in what people think they hear, just proof that they do. Something I never get.

If "a lot of people" don't notice it, then it must be largely, if not completely, inconsequential.

So the myth goes...

Excellent post, Xybert. 128 kbps does have a rather rough sound to it. My personal threshold is 256, but I know others claim that they have to at least get to 320 before they can't hear a difference. Either way, it was nice to hear a proffessional opinion.

Here's an interesting read and listen. https://cdvsmp3.wordpress.com/2014/06/21/aac-vs-mp3-a-comparison-through-null-testing/

If anyone wants to try it themselves, there are plenty of online tests, or you can download foobar2000 for Windows http://www.foobar2000.org/download, or Lacinato if you have a Mac http://lacinato.com/cm/software/othersoft/abx. Feel free to cut and paste your results here so that we have more than just anecdotal evidence. I have done a Foobar ABX in the past, as well as a few online tests (though it's impossible to know how accurate the playback of those are), not to mention my own personal non-blind test. I hear nothing of note above 256 VBR AAC, and failed every test. For those who can, that's awesome, I suppose. But from every graph I've ever seen, the only place they've ever found any difference is a quicker rolloff over 16kHz. And if you're 30 or older, chances are very good you can't hear anything over 16kHz anyway. That's one of the main reasons I get such a kick out of Neil Young.

I can't hear the difference between CD and 256 AAC, so not very well. Nor do I care. It all sounds great to me. That's all that counts. And it's not like I don't take audio seriously.

The only interesting aspect of the Governor was his daughter, IMO. Aside from that I found his character painfully boring, and that contrived accent just made it even worse. ***SPOILER ALERT*** If you're not caught up on the show, you don't want to read any further. When they killed Hershel, I was saying to myself that if the Governor makes it through that episode I was going to give up on it. If you're going to kill off the most interesting character on the show, it's only fair you also kill off the least interesting.

The Governor was quite possibly the most irritating character ever created.

The multiple plot lines thing had gotten a little tedious during the first part of this past season. It became somewhat of an annoyance because they only covered one per episode. I think one of the problems is that you have different writers for different shows. But, the last couple of episodes leading up to the midseason finale kind of brought things back around to a more coherent and cohesive storyline.

I wouldn't say that, Paul. Lance Armstrong was such a recent and relevant actor in our culture that it seems like a perfectly reasonable and honest mistake.

The last great horror flick, IMO.

AAC isn't proprietray to Apple, my friend. http://www.stereophile.com/features/308mp3cd/index.html "It is true that there are better-performing MP3 codecs than the basic Fraunhöfer—many audiophiles recommend the LAME encoder—but the AAC codec used by iTunes has better resolution than MP3 at the same bit rate (if a little noisier at the top of the audioband). If you want the maximum number of files on your iPod, therefore, you take less of a quality hit if you use AAC encoding than if you use MP3. But "CD quality"? Yeah, right!" Let your ears do the talking. It has nothing to do with Apple. AAC is superior to MP3. Not by much, IMO. But it is better.

Huh??? AAC is the successor to MP3, and has better sound quality at equal sampling rates. It's the superior codec of the two. Your statement doesn't really make sense...

Wow! Whether you liked them or not, those shows were anything but dumb. They were some of the most creative comedy shows ever written, and perfectly acted by their stars. If they weren't your cup of tea, fine. But dumb they were not.

Rigamortis? There's another station that is trying to cash in on the zombie craze. At times the zombies on this show move like olympic sprinters. I think the show is called Z Nation. I watched it once. Must be based on World War Z where the zombies moved at sprinter-like speeds. I really don't get the whole zombie fetish that overtook pop culture the last couple of years, but I do find The Walking Dead to be a very well-written and acted show. Other than that, I avoid anything zombie-related.

Brilliant show, with one of the best ensemble casts of all time! I'd put them right up at the top with shows like The Andy Griffith Show, M*A*S*H*, All In The family, and Seinfeld. Ms. Douglas pulled her character off to perfection. Too bad that became her achilles heel when it came to getting more work after the show. Anyone else notice that both The Beverly Hillbillies and The Andy Griffith Show kind of went to shit when they switched over to color? (of course, Don Knotts not renewing had a lot to do with AG going downhill)

So do I have it straight that other than having Vibrations added, there is really no other compelling reason to purchase this reissue?

No, I just hate snooty people who are completely full of shit. First you say: "I would certainly hope I know more than I did in 8th period -- in most areas. Period." Then you contradict yourself with: Here, why not take this test and post the results: http://www.free-test-online.com/middle/8th_grade_algebra1.htm

Really? So you're better at algebra now than you were in 8th grade, Brad? Please... Pardon me while I don my hip waders, because the shit is getting incredibly deep.

Why pay anything? When I was using Windoh's I went with a triumverate of Malwarebytes, Adaware, and AVG. All free.