|
So Beatport stopped labeling thier tracks? (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zyklon_Jay |
you already believe what you want to believe.
you are the probably the best at arguing on TA, that being said sometimes you are so focused on winning an argument that you fail to look outside of the box.
you are right system, my ears are and i can't tell the difference at all on a world class system... |
|
|
| Zyklon_Jay |
| quote: | Originally posted by Seandroid
Hahahhahahahahah.
Hahahhaa.
Technology has regressed? Really? REALLY!? Is that even possible?
"Damn, kids, they sure don't make cell phones like they used to! Mine had Snake on it!" |
i'm not talking overall...i'm talking speakers.
have you ever played on older monitors or speakers from the 70's??
i have. |
|
|
| Woonyxoxo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zyklon_Jay
you already believe what you want to believe.
you are the probably the best at arguing on TA, that being said sometimes you are so focused on winning an argument that you fail to look outside of the box.
you are right system, my ears are and i can't tell the difference at all on a world class system... |
His point is, he is backed up by scientific studies and facts while your argument is based upon anecdotal highly subjective completely non-scientific evidience. As he said you thinking it's real doesn't make it real.(people with systems unable to play the differences think they can clearely hear it for example, if you want to hear a difference you'll think you hear it even if there isn't one.) |
|
|
| bas |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
However, he says it in an awkward way which I don't really agree with.
"We are still completely for DJs" is just stroking their ego's a bit more and making normal costumers feel unwanted. |
Why does that matter? I'd rather there be a download site that caters solely to DJs, non-DJs have tons of other outlets to get their music other than something like Beatport. If they feel unwanted, what's the harm? They'll go elsewhere (like they probably already do), and Beatport will continue to sell to DJs like they already do.
See:
| quote: | | I mean let's face it: if you're a generic pop fan, you're not going to come to Beatport anyway. It's more expensive than going to iTunes or Amazon, it's not the same kind of shopping experience you're used to if you're a non-DJ. |
|
|
|
| Bierheld |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
Why does that matter? I'd rather there be a download site that caters solely to DJs, non-DJs have tons of other outlets to get their music other than something like Beatport. If they feel unwanted, what's the harm? They'll go elsewhere (like they probably already do), and Beatport will continue to sell to DJs like they already do.
See: |
He´s a CEO, if you believe in your product you should not explicitly say that you solely care for DJ´s and your other costumers can go somewhere else for all you care.
It´s also pure elitism. |
|
|
| MelonBoy |
| quote: | | Originally posted by Zyklon_Jay Even cds don't sound proper compared to records. |
Then the difference must be in the sound system. Anything is better than .wav for a human being. |
|
|
| stevö |
i was just about to post that. love the ponytail. |
|
|
| LAdazeNYnights |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
I suppose it depends on whether you believe that some people have more sensitive ears then others, or that the problem lies between their ears.
I've seen a very extensive blind listening test by our consumer advice group a few years ago who employed a very wide panel of listeners, anything from casual listeners to audiophiles. Using nothing but high end sound systems. And they found that, although the result differed per genre, the highest bitrate people were able to differentiate between compressed and non compressed audio was 256kbps.
That's from a practical standpoint. I'm not quite sure about the theory behind it. I know the idea behind lossy audio compression
is to cut out frequencies that we are unable to hear anyway. And that if the bitrate is too low artefacts can appear which I'm sure we've all heard at some point in the past. However, despite the mp3 format being a few decades old the fact that none of the technically superior formats (mp3PRO, AAC, WMA, OGG vorbis (goes up to 500kbps f.i.))
ever took it's place says enough about it's quality to me. |
appreciate the thoughtful reply here, and the conversation it opened up. |
|
|
| bas |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
He´s a CEO, if you believe in your product you should not explicitly say that you solely care for DJ´s and your other costumers can go somewhere else for all you care.
It´s also pure elitism. |
As a DJ, it's pretty refreshing to know the CEO is catering directly to our needs and not the needs of the average music listener. Elitism and exclusivity are exactly what sets them apart.
You don't see Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos saying stuff like this. |
|
|
| Bierheld |
And the qualities that make it interesting for DJ´s couldn´t possibly be things ´normal´ costumers would like as well? I'm not a DJ in the professional sense but I still like their big catalogue and excellent service. Why not market that as well?
Oh yeah, DJ people find sharing their services with normal listeners (plebs) to be a personal offence to their excellence. Forgot about that. |
|
|
| sg_57 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bierheld
I've seen a very extensive blind listening test by our consumer advice group a few years ago who employed a very wide panel of listeners, anything from casual listeners to audiophiles. Using nothing but high end sound systems. And they found that, although the result differed per genre, the highest bitrate people were able to differentiate between compressed and non compressed audio was 256kbps. |
Sorry, was AFK.
I do not deny one bit all of the blind test results, and actually personally agree with the findings. But they were all without exception performed in small rooms.
What I am trying to articulate is that no one has bothered to do the same in very large-scale installations. There, it is truly my belief that those difference will be much easier to pick out.
They are actually not in the domain of frequency response and aliasing artifacts. Rather in the very fabric (that word again) of the music, what glues the sounds together. The dynamics, the punch, clarity of separation, perception of transients between instruments and all that. Especially the bass.
Like the analogy of someone who takes a beautiful jpeg from a web site and is all surprised when it looks like Minecraft once blown up to the size of billboard advertising like those on the side of the LIE.
Run those A/B tests again in a proper auditorium that's at least 75' x 150' with a real large sound system and proper acoustics so the reflections don't muddy everything up.
Even if empirically, I have. Not scientifically, granted. That's my contribution to the convo. |
|
|
|
|
