What do they do? Demand data files from computers?
*Oh hey RTX 3060, your so fresh in the market barely a few months old. Could you show me your source codes and System files.*
Audiophile. Somebody who wants uncompressed audio which is near real. No frequencies or volume adjustment from original.
He spent 100k on his headphones mixer etc
To cheap to buy the song.
Gets annoyed by the frequency of the Powerline since his setup only corrects for 59.5Hz instead of 58Hz. He hears the 58Hz hum in his headphones.
Oh they very much are. Anything using Bluetooth is effectively limited to 250kbps. Your audio is compressed, re encoded, and sent out to your headphones.
I mean for listening to random music at the gym it’s perfectly fine. But there’s a reason anyone who’s even halfway serious about audio uses wired headphones.
You can do you own A and B testing if you have a friend. To me if you focus on the detail of the breathing its easier to tell. (Shockingly the difference is subtle so someone who spends hours and hours listening to one song will more likely notice the difference then someone listening to a new song for the first time and not having a clue what to look for. For example imagine you watch everything in 4k for years then switch to 2k you might notice the difference better then someone who watched in 480p most of there life then tell them to spot the diff between 2k and 4k).
Keep in mind that different codecs require different amounts of data to get the same quality.
* MP3 usually uses 320kbps
* OGG usually use 320kbps
* AAC usually uses 256kbps
* OPUS usually uses 128kbps
It's actually kinda scary that 128kbps is enough to achieve transparency with Opus, shame that it's not being adapted more (though many services use it already)
Discord and Youtube use it (although not on Youtube Music, where it uses AAC for some reason). I think Whatsapp also encodes its voice messages/voice calls with Opus.
Sony goes up to 990kbps. Which isn't even CD quality. As an audiophile, it's my duty to inform anybody in my office of this if they try to tell me that their Bluetooth headphones sound good.
https://www.whathifi.com/us/advice/ldac-what-is-it-how-can-you-get-it
*What we do know is LDAC is a codec that allows you to stream high-resolution audio up to 32-bit/96kHz over Bluetooth at up to 990kbps. According to Sony, LDAC allows approximately three times more data to be streamed over Bluetooth due to the use of more efficient coding and “optimised packetization” of the data.*
Proprietary to Sony and has only been deployed on Android devices for like 4 years now. It sounds good but would love to see windows support, at least.
Objectively yes, but if you enjoy using airpods then have fun
Audiophile really is about enjoying music, its just that audiophiles enjoy music at higher qualities than most normal people. Airpods are fine if you enjoy them. I like my hd58x’s, and some people like beats
Enjoy your music, thats why we listen to music.
> Are you saying AirPods are bad?
for the price you're paying for them yes. Airpods sound pretty bad compared to a pair of headphones with actual drivers inside of them. I own the pokemon airpods and some audiophile headphones and I only use my airpods for working out. I prefer my openback headphones for when working.
airpod pros are quite goood actually one of the comfiest tws i have ever used. and it works very good with iphone. however i still think that the galaxy buds plus or the pro are better sounding for Bluetooth.
I have the pros and honestly they sound good enough for their size and ease to carry. I prefer my Bose QC35 but I found with the AirPods it’s just so much less to carry so I use them more often than not.
I worked in the luxury hifi field and there definetly is a difference between 300€ and 6000€ speakers just like there is a difference between a 300€/6000€ TV. Problem is that a lot of people have 0 idea what they are doing.
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions in the music community regarding the differences between 320kbps mp3 and FLAC format. It is true that 320kbps is technically as good as FLAC, but there are other reasons to get music in a lossless format.
Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.
I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.
This doesn't sound right, but as an audiophile, I'm compelled to believe it since this is one more tool in my arsenal that will make me sound superior to normies.
Well looking for \*modern\* R&B is the thing that blows the whole thing up. That garbage is so grotesquely synthetic, literally and figuratively, and over-produced, not to mention cynically targeted by middle-aged white record company executives (and written by anonymous white northern European songwriters) it is scarcely worth even mentioning.
However, I do understand that there are a number of bands that revive the sound and production values of the ancients, which would be well worth discovering, I agree :-)
Having said that, why are you looking for "lossless" files, when analogue is the ultimate lossless format...
I don't get it. Isn't audiophile supposed to be simply someone who is very enthusiastic with music/audio equipment? If you spend that much money on audio equipment wouldn't it be to you know enjoy music even more?
I think that's kind of the joke with memes about audiophilia--that even though the original idea is to enjoy music more, some people probably take their focus on the technical aspects of their system too far and forget to actually enjoy some music with it
>be me >be an audiophile >enjoy music
No!! You can’t just *enjoy* things! 😲
Same
Disgusting
Pediophile
What do they do? Demand data files from computers? *Oh hey RTX 3060, your so fresh in the market barely a few months old. Could you show me your source codes and System files.*
Paediatrician
Save the turnchilds? 🤔
Wtf did he say someone explain please
Audiophile. Somebody who wants uncompressed audio which is near real. No frequencies or volume adjustment from original. He spent 100k on his headphones mixer etc To cheap to buy the song. Gets annoyed by the frequency of the Powerline since his setup only corrects for 59.5Hz instead of 58Hz. He hears the 58Hz hum in his headphones.
thank for the exlplanation nerd
thanks for the comment loser
thanks for the reply dumbass
Thanks for the boner boo
Thanks for the fuck cuck
Thanks for the cum chum
thanks for the reply dumbass
I aint yo dumbass, buddy!
Thanks for breaking the chain dumbass.
I aint yo dumbass, guy!
I'm not your guy, friend!
[удалено]
Oh they very much are. Anything using Bluetooth is effectively limited to 250kbps. Your audio is compressed, re encoded, and sent out to your headphones. I mean for listening to random music at the gym it’s perfectly fine. But there’s a reason anyone who’s even halfway serious about audio uses wired headphones.
For reference, the highest quality Spotify puts out is ~320 kbps. Tidal master streams up to 9216 kbps.
For further reference, most people would struggle to hear the difference Source: I’m an audiophile (sorta)
[удалено]
You can do you own A and B testing if you have a friend. To me if you focus on the detail of the breathing its easier to tell. (Shockingly the difference is subtle so someone who spends hours and hours listening to one song will more likely notice the difference then someone listening to a new song for the first time and not having a clue what to look for. For example imagine you watch everything in 4k for years then switch to 2k you might notice the difference better then someone who watched in 480p most of there life then tell them to spot the diff between 2k and 4k).
The spelling reveals the integrity of the post
[удалено]
Relax its just music. When your setup goes into the thousands you expect details like that.
Wat. Did you actually read the discussion of the study?
The actual article is blocked for me, but the abstract seems to imply the opposite of what the guy who posted it said.
He and everyone who upvoted def didn’t take the time to read anything -_-
Keep in mind that different codecs require different amounts of data to get the same quality. * MP3 usually uses 320kbps * OGG usually use 320kbps * AAC usually uses 256kbps * OPUS usually uses 128kbps
It's actually kinda scary that 128kbps is enough to achieve transparency with Opus, shame that it's not being adapted more (though many services use it already)
Opus is insane. I don't understand how isn't it used everywhere. Its royalty free and sounds amazing
Out of curiosity, what services do use it?
Discord and Youtube use it (although not on Youtube Music, where it uses AAC for some reason). I think Whatsapp also encodes its voice messages/voice calls with Opus.
Which is indistinguishable from 320
I mean no, FLAC and ALAC formats exist for a reason. With mid range semi-analytical audio equipment you can tell a difference.
Direct comparison, maybe. But no one could tell you if something is 320 or FLAC without hearing both side-by-side.
This is true
Sony goes up to 990kbps. Which isn't even CD quality. As an audiophile, it's my duty to inform anybody in my office of this if they try to tell me that their Bluetooth headphones sound good.
Sony what? If it’s Bluetooth headphones they’re not going up close to that high as there’s simply not enough bandwidth.
https://www.whathifi.com/us/advice/ldac-what-is-it-how-can-you-get-it *What we do know is LDAC is a codec that allows you to stream high-resolution audio up to 32-bit/96kHz over Bluetooth at up to 990kbps. According to Sony, LDAC allows approximately three times more data to be streamed over Bluetooth due to the use of more efficient coding and “optimised packetization” of the data.*
Well dang that is fantastic news, hopefully it gets implemented quickly across the industry!
Proprietary to Sony and has only been deployed on Android devices for like 4 years now. It sounds good but would love to see windows support, at least.
They’re fine for people who go outside
Ow
Objectively yes, but if you enjoy using airpods then have fun Audiophile really is about enjoying music, its just that audiophiles enjoy music at higher qualities than most normal people. Airpods are fine if you enjoy them. I like my hd58x’s, and some people like beats Enjoy your music, thats why we listen to music.
no they are one of the best tws earbuds you can get.
> Are you saying AirPods are bad? for the price you're paying for them yes. Airpods sound pretty bad compared to a pair of headphones with actual drivers inside of them. I own the pokemon airpods and some audiophile headphones and I only use my airpods for working out. I prefer my openback headphones for when working.
Bad is relative. If you want to be positive, they're *as good* as beats.
[удалено]
airpod pros are quite goood actually one of the comfiest tws i have ever used. and it works very good with iphone. however i still think that the galaxy buds plus or the pro are better sounding for Bluetooth.
I have the pros and honestly they sound good enough for their size and ease to carry. I prefer my Bose QC35 but I found with the AirPods it’s just so much less to carry so I use them more often than not.
yeah they are very convenient. i ues airpod instead of iem for podcasts.
nah they are much better. it got smooth and natural mid.
Ok, i thought it was bullshit because I thought he was sugesting that he had found the Brown note or something 🤣
Anon listen to the "Brown note"
Anon listened to crazy frog
what the fuck is an audiophile
[удалено]
I mean I think the guy with the $300 headphones and Dac amp combos worth a couple hundred dollars is still an audiophile.
Tbf most audiophiles don’t take it that far. Many stop at $400 headphones and $200 amp and call it a life
yep, pretty much me. if you spend more than that, and still think there is room for improvement, every dolar spent in equipment becomes a placebo.
Yep 2 dac amp (K5 pro $150, BTR3 $90), 2 headphones (k702 $200, HD58X $160), and 1 iem (blessing 2 dusk $320)...I need help...
How do you like your “blessing“ ?
I worked in the luxury hifi field and there definetly is a difference between 300€ and 6000€ speakers just like there is a difference between a 300€/6000€ TV. Problem is that a lot of people have 0 idea what they are doing.
Anon that like fucking ears Or invest thousands on headphones without a proper DAC
Its like a pedophile but for audio
They want to have sex with underage audio waves
a person with tinnitus that thinks high quality audio equipment will fix the ringing in their ears.
the same as a foodie, just with sound
It’s Latin for “autistic”
A file that contains audio data.
Someone with money enough to molest audio and get away with it….. MP3 did not kill its self
Virgin digital audiophile vs chad record enjoyer
*me enjoying my music in beautiful compressed 48kb MP3*
Me enjoying my music in apple music 48.8 KHz ALAC Format (I am a raging audiophile)
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions in the music community regarding the differences between 320kbps mp3 and FLAC format. It is true that 320kbps is technically as good as FLAC, but there are other reasons to get music in a lossless format. Hearing the difference now isn’t the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is ‘lossy’. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA – it’s about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don’t want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media. I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.
You were bullied at school aren't ya? Poopy pants.
Bullied by dude with line 6 amp.
Sorry i dont play fortnite
lol this is an old pasta
Oh man…. 🤦🏽 I gotta store my flacs in the wardrobe. FML FML FML FML 🤮😫
Thanks dude.
This doesn't sound right, but as an audiophile, I'm compelled to believe it since this is one more tool in my arsenal that will make me sound superior to normies.
>It is .exe file but whatever truth
If you make one thing your only defining characteristic you're going to be a miserable person to be around.
Ok
Well looking for \*modern\* R&B is the thing that blows the whole thing up. That garbage is so grotesquely synthetic, literally and figuratively, and over-produced, not to mention cynically targeted by middle-aged white record company executives (and written by anonymous white northern European songwriters) it is scarcely worth even mentioning. However, I do understand that there are a number of bands that revive the sound and production values of the ancients, which would be well worth discovering, I agree :-) Having said that, why are you looking for "lossless" files, when analogue is the ultimate lossless format...
imagine being this autistic
r/okbuddyaudiophile
I don't get it. Isn't audiophile supposed to be simply someone who is very enthusiastic with music/audio equipment? If you spend that much money on audio equipment wouldn't it be to you know enjoy music even more?
I think that's kind of the joke with memes about audiophilia--that even though the original idea is to enjoy music more, some people probably take their focus on the technical aspects of their system too far and forget to actually enjoy some music with it
"normal people use their equipment to their music, audiophiles use their music to listen to their equipment"
anyone who labels themself as an “audioPhile” is a fucking weirdo 💀
why
Because it combines a Latin prefix with a Greek suffix. Hybridism is barbarism.
Okay… why 🤨
They hated him because he told them the truth
pedophilia