Am I the only one that hates the "I only listen to losslessly compressed audio" crowd

[pennylane]

I can't tell the difference. I listen to alt preset standard. I do have rips of all my CDs in FLAC, though. I store them on the comp and then leave the real discs at home, never to be touched. Burning a CD from MP3, while "transparent"... could in theory lead to generation loss if I have to rip the CD again and what not. It's just good to have "master" quality in easy access.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: davestar

Originally posted by: apoppin
CD DOes suck . . . compared to vinyl . . . on a really audiophile system . . . you have to be DEAF to not hear the difference
[or an "engineer"]:roll: . . .
:thumbsdown:

sure, there will be a difference, but that'll be due to either:

(1) the mastering/A-to-D conversion or
(2) the random errors introduced by "reading" an anolog source (the record)

for a band-limited signal, there's no change in the audible spectrum between a record and CD

absolute nonsense.

the CD definitely is "missing" at the extreme ends of the audio spectrum, the transients and the "imaging" - compared to vinyl.

An engineer would dispute this but most of them are deaf or brainwashed [in my experience].

i've proved this years ago - on my own home audiophile system time-and-again, over and over . . .

at the time i was using a Grado Signature Cartridge, a [belt-drive] Thorens TT, Stacked and imaged Dahlquist-10 speakers, a Mark Levinson modified Harmon Kardon Citration Tube Preamp [no balance or tone controls] and at least 600w/channel.

I used the best Denon CD player of the time as the reference CD player and it was OBVIOUS . . . even to a slightly "educated" ear.

 

[AnyMal]

Originally posted by: notfred
I ignore them.

Exactly. Whpo gives a crap. Would you argue with some who prefers a 4-ply toilet paper because you think 3-ply is sufficient?

 

[her209]

I copy all my CDs as ISOs.