Raimund Specht, you posted:
>Walt, I have just prepared a quick comparison of both uncompressed
>and compressed digital audio as you suggested:
>
>http://www.avisoft-saslab.com/compression/compression.htm
Thank you, Raimund, this is a very nice illustration of what's going
on in a typical good psychoacoustic data reduction scheme. Could you
add the color/level scale to your spectrogram illustrations?
>I guess, that you will argue, that these tests were made with MP3
>and not with the latest ATRAC system.
You're using a similar data compression ratio, and MP3 is designed
with similar principles to ATRAC, so I thank you for composing a very
helpful educational page. If I were to ATRAC process and unprocess
your test file, without analog conversions, would you be willing to
plot and post those results too?
>However, I will NOT buy one of
>these expensive MiniDisk machines. The underlaying principles are
>always the same. The improvements may lead to better listening
>pleasure, but the loss of data will remain.
What compromises you accept in exchange for economy and portability
are always up for discussion, and ultimately a personal choice. I get
fabulous, publishable recordings of both music and nature on a cheap
Sharp portable MD! I agree with Walt that the degradations of "lossy
compression" recording are almost always insignificant for both
personal and scientific uses, and your excellent analysis of MP3
doesn't change that opinion. Thank you for making the discussion more
objective.
-Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|