The downloaded Linn MP3 sounds very slightly louder than the MP3 that I converted myself.
The downloaded Linn MP3 sounds very slightly louder than the original FLAC version.
But the MP3 that I converted myself sounds identical the the original FLAC version.
So you ABXed the two mp3s then?
So if you are able to differentiate between them using ABX, what do you deduce from that?
That the MP3 I converted myself sounds different to the MP3 that was downloaded from Linn.
But I couldn't tell the difference in an ABX test between the MP3 I converted myself and the Linn FLAC file. These two sound identical.
So what do you deduce from *that*?
CA StreamMagic 6 | CA 751BD | CA 651A | PMC DB1i
Moderator. mail: john.duncan.whf at the mail of g dot com
That the Linn MP3 has been mastered to sound different to the FLAC version.
PC > AVI Neutron Five 2.1
32GB Sony NWZ-A846 Walkman > Westone UM3x
Which is at odds with what they've said, right?
What Linn are saying doesn't make much sense.
See post #12 on page 16.
Here's todays free track 'Sunbeam Melts The Hour' by RM Hubbert.
I think that these three pictures can speak for themselves.
Linn downloaded MP3
Linn downloaded FLAC
My MP3 converted from the original Linn FLAC file
If anyone reading this thread wants to check out my finding for themselves you can download and install Audacity from here: Clicky
You can download todays FLAC and MP3 files from Linn from here: Clicky
Then all that you need to do is open the MP3 and FLAC files in Audacity and see what they look and sound like for yourselves.
You tell me.
In the context of Steve's findings, I don't think it did make sense. Sure, a file may be different depending which mp3 decoder is used, but none should change the volume, change the dynamic range or delete the beginning and end. Hence my question / conclusion (not specifically aimed at Steve, although he's welcome to answer). Hard to say which of the options, although the ignorance / incompetence would be fairly staggering.
HiFi / A/V / Bedroom
Strange line of questioning JD, what do you deduce from Steves findings? I can think of a third option, maybe Linn don't care as much about the quality of the mp3. They could always ask Steve which mp3 encoder he is using that seems to be consistently better than theirs.
Synology NAS + Audio Station - ATV2 - Benchmark DAC1 HDR - Event Opal
I don't think what Linn says makes sense.
Audio compression (reduction of audio dynamic range) is a completely different situation, and effect, to digital compression (used to reduce file sizes).
FLAC and MP3 are digital file compression techniques, not audio dynamic range of loudness compression techniques.
Linn's explanation does not believably satisfy steve_1979's enquiry.
His conversions to MP3 clearly illustrate that.
If the quality hasn't suffered (and TBF Steve has emphasized this), and Linn's 320 kbps is up with the best of them, everything else is surely academic.
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." André Gide
To answer an earlier question about what we can deduce from Steves findings, I'd guess that the mp3s were made or taken from different sources than the high resolution samples. If not then the mp3s were created from the high res recordings and the files then amended.
Unless the mp3 encoders used, arbitrarily effect dynamic range, volume and track length.
What about you JD? What do you think?
Mac mini > AVI ADM9Ts
But he has said that some tracks sound different.
I think they were the Non-Linn Record ones......which they can't alter.
(I'm too tired to trawl back, to find out for sure)
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing