Originally Posted by Espo77
Originally Posted by sealteamz6
Espo77, I appreciate your input, however I have made it quite clear that the quality of the audio files I am listening to is not the issue. My Itunes files are 320MP3. Youtube streams at 128MP3. It doesnt make sense I have no bass with itunes but bass with youtube. But it seems setting my speakers to small has fixed the issue I was having. On a side note, audiophilies can go on and on about mp3 being bad and lossless being the way to go but I have always been into great sound and quality gear and always been satisfied with MP3. Not to mention I barely notice any difference with Lossless versus MP3 and if im not mistaken many tests have shown that the difference is quite small. Obviously lossless is better but MP3 is not going to just give out no bass. my problem wasnt compressed bass, it was a lack of it. Now that I set my speakers to small I seem to be getting good bass from my subs while playing my music on itunes. I may be new to this compared to most of you, but I made sure it wasnt the audio quality considering I was getting the exact same sound (a lack of bass) playing a lossless file
Picked up from Stereophile:
"MP3 files are smaller in size because music is discarded...Less Bits=Less Music...It doesn't make sense to spend "audiophile grade money" on equipment and use MP3 as your main source of music. MP3's do not offer sufficient audio quality for serious music listening." I realize that you are happy going with the higher Itunes 320MP3 and YouTube's 128MP3.
Also, I'm not cutting down your choice in music, and there's nothing that gets me going as much as a great A/C D/C song, ZZ Top, Zeppelin...but the hard rock and metal might not make it on someone's demo disc as a reference for fidelity.
Taking everything written in Stereophiile as being the gospel truth is like flunking an IQ test.
Let's give the first sentence above a "sniff test".
Does Less Bits=Less Music?
What about lossless compressed files? They have less bits because mathematically redundant bits have been removed, but they can be instantly and easily converted back into their original redundancy-filled selves. Do they contain less music? Of course not, because 100% of the original music, 100% of the original information is preserved and can be reconstituted at will.
I may even be able to find another Stereophile article that agrees with me! ;-)
Stereophile is just a journal of opinion, and there is no rule that says that all
of the opinions it publishes have to exactly agree. I've personally discussed this matter with the editor, John Atkinson and I rather suspect that as much pain as it would cause him, he'd be forced to agree with me about this point.