Listen to my new Ultimatum & Deliverance records!

I don't think it's a "fact" that MP3's "suck" at all, I think that's complete and utter nonsense, to me MP3s for the most part sound pretty good, a lot of the time I seriously cannot tell the difference between listening to an MP3 on Amazon and a CD.

Well, "suck" is a pretty subjective term. I mean, I can listen to a 78 rpm record and find it perfectly listenable and musical. Ditto for MP3. Is it the most accurate way to reproduce music, even in smaller formats? It's pretty well universally regarded that the format is technically awful. There are other "high compression" formats that preserve more of the actual music while also keeping the file size down.

Most of them basically looked at MP3, saw what it did wrong and tried to improve on the model though, so it does have the distinction (as far as I'm aware) of being first.

At this point, it's really down to tech. When MP3 first came out, hard drives were into the early gigabyte storage levels. Now we're counting terabytes. Why shouldn't the formats evolve to take advantage of that?

Just a thought. I'm not trying to take away anyone's MP3s, but I think it's hard to argue that it can't and shouldn't be done better when you consider how cheap storage is and how fast download speeds have gotten. If there was anything about Neil Young's Pono experiment that I support, it's the idea that it may inspire iTunes and Amazon to upgrade their digital stores to carry hi-def stuff at hte same price point. Because nothing about HDTracks entices me in the least.

Runicen wrote:

YOU MEAN MY PURCHASE WON'T BE FLOWN DOWN BY A MAJESTIC EAGLE THAT IS SINGING MY PRAISES AS IT DESCENDS?

NO SALE!    

Well, maybe if Amazon gets their drones up and running they can fit them with speakers.

The difference between digital and analog formats is miles for me--yet nary an inch for some. And that's okay. For instance, I threw on Rocks for a buddy, first vinyl and then remastered CD. He couldn't tell a difference--and I couldn't believe him at first. To me, the guy who has to restrain himself from constantly fiddling with an eq, it was so freaking obvious. So props to anyone who prefers digital to analog, downloads to physical. My main issues with downloading are more aesthetic than anything (like Runicen said, the experience). Losing that physical medium is losing a moderate asset that has historically enhanced the listening experience.

Vexer6 wrote:

I don't think it's a "fact" that MP3's "suck" at all, I think that's complete and utter nonsense, to me MP3s for the most part sound pretty good, a lot of the time I seriously cannot tell the difference between listening to an MP3 on Amazon and a CD.

Sucks may be a the wrong word to use. MP3s are in fact compressed file formats, much like a JPG file. In order to attain that compression some information must be discarded. The quality of sound must necessarily be compromised. That is a fact.

If you take a high-rez photo at 300 dpi and save it as a TIF or EPS format, you lose very little information and it prints beautifully. If you take that same 300 dpi photo and save it as a JPG format, you automatically lose some of the quality of that original photo. It might print fine, depending on what compression level you save it as, but it is a FACT that it's not of the same quality as the TIF or EPS format.

Same holds true for MP3 format. It is a compressed file format and therefore isn't the same quality as other formats such as those used on CDs.

corplhicks wrote:

The difference between digital and analog formats is miles for me--yet nary an inch for some. And that's okay. For instance, I threw on Rocks for a buddy, first vinyl and then remastered CD. He couldn't tell a difference--and I couldn't believe him at first. To me, the guy who has to restrain himself from constantly fiddling with an eq, it was so freaking obvious. So props to anyone who prefers digital to analog, downloads to physical. My main issues with downloading are more aesthetic than anything (like Runicen said, the experience). Losing that physical medium is losing a moderate asset that has historically enhanced the listening experience.

I agree with so that so much, I was always a soldier for the physical medium. I wanted a CD collection that could rival anyone's in this board. Unfortunatly, due to bad decisions I've made over the years I was forced to sell the majority of my collection. That collection sell helped out quite a bit but years of hard work, lots of money spent, and increased credit card debt was wiped out. This was part of the stupid decisions I've made. I would have loved to continue my collection but the price was too high. Now I make good money but all of it goes to either necessities, gas, and debt. I don't have much in the way of spending money and I need to decrease debt not increase it. Once I do start getting some extra spending money, I will have to switch to digital. It's cheaper and doesn't take up room (which living with my mom is limited). Maybe I will win the lottery but I have a better chance of a romance with Zooey Deschanel or meeting a talking dog than that.