• this@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    663·
    2 years ago

    The meme is literally correct. when you make an audio file into an mp3, it takes some of the sonic information that our brains are bad at noticing and just…completely removes it(to save storage space). if it’s a high quallity mp3 its essentially completely unnoticable. That’s why it’s psychoacoustic, it uses psychology to fool your brain into thinking it sounds better than it does, litterally.

    Psycoachoustic is basically just a big word for taking into account how our brains deal with what we hear.

    Also I’m not saying mp3 is bad, in fact I think the opposite is true. I think it’s good to think of it like being the .JPG of audio, you’re not getting the original quallity and that’s the point and unless you need to do manipulate that audio file and its a reasonable quallity then you likely won’t notice the difference.

    Ogg vorbis (.ogg) is a better codec though IMO.

    *edited for spelling and grammers

    • apostrofail@lemmy.world
      14·
      2 years ago
      • literally* correct
      • it’s* essentially
      • That’s why it’s psychoacoustic*, it uses psychology* to fool your brain into thinking it sounds better than it does, literally*.
      • that’s* the point
      • it’s* a reasonable quality*
  • Yardy Sardley@lemmy.ca
    8·
    2 years ago

    Not just mp3, all lossy audio formats use psychoacoustic analysis. That’s how they figure out which data to throw out.

  • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
    3·
    2 years ago

    Does anyone know of any massive double blind study where they see what actual mp3 bitrate where people stop being able to tell the difference in quality?

    I’ve tried and can’t tell the difference between any 320kbps and lossless.

    • mbirth 🇬🇧@lemmy.mlEnglish
      3·
      2 years ago

      There was one where the guy behind it went to massive lengths so people couldn’t easily distinguish the example files by other means than audio quality. Verdict was that people with more expensive equipment even preferred the sound of the MP3s (320kbps CBR). I think it was this one (Links to Parts 2 and 3 at the bottom.).

      Somewhere else I’ve read that - for most humans - 256 kbps MP3s encoded with VBR-ABR using a high-end encoder are basically indistinguishable from the lossless original. Even at 192 kbps it’s still more hit&miss than it should be. But I don’t remember where I’ve read that.

    • customley@lemm.ee
      2·
      2 years ago

      Did you try on Bluetooth headphones? If so you won’t notice any difference because Bluetooth has very limited bandwidth and can’t really handle anything more than a standard MP3 (unless you have Sony headphones which use LDAC).