Kids *prefer* the sizzle of MP3s...

[rawktron]

I didn't see this story on here so I thought I'd post it. A prof at Stanford has been doing a study over a number of years studying people's preferences in audio quality - and shockingly - the crap sound of 128kbps MP3s is preferred.

http://i.gizmodo.com/5166649/ipods-and- ... oyed-music

From the article:

Students were asked to judge the quality of a variety of compression methods randomly mixed with uncompressed 44.1 KHz audio. The music examples included both orchestral, jazz and rock music. When I first did this I was expecting to hear preferences for uncompressed audio and expecting to see MP3 (at 128, 160 and 192 bit rates) well below other methods (including a proprietary wavelet-based approach and AAC). To my surprise, in the rock examples the MP3 at 128 was preferred. I repeated the experiment over 6 years and found the preference for MP3 - particularly in music with high energy (cymbal crashes, brass hits, etc) rising over time.

So yeah. There you go. Apparently kids prefer that 'sizzling' 128kbps sound. Discuss? Weep?

[ubertar]

(Most) people like what they're used to. It's familiar and comforting.

[charlievela]

Time to pack it in boys, and dust off that old mini-disc recorder. Quadruple Platinum for sure!

[mcsquishytooshy]

With today's modern mp3 compression algorithms, most people can't even tell the difference between bitrates, especially at 162 and up.

[Jeff White]

I'll admit, with the setting I use for the LAME iTunes encoder, it's really tough to tell the difference. 3D quality is the first hint.

Jeff

[Snarl 12/8]

I recently threw out all my old tapes from childhood/college. I kept a few that I thought my daughter might like, since she has the last tape capable boom box in the house. Last night she said that she couldn't find her MP3 player, so she listened to CSNY on tape and thought it sounded better than CD/MP3, totally unprompted by me. I thought that was kinda cool.

We just gotta teach the children well.

I'm thinking of setting up a turntable and showing her those big, huge CD's we listened to when I was a kid.

[RefD]

*listens to "Tubby The Tuba" 45*

*feels old*

[PeterAuslan]

About a year ago over at record-producer.com there was listening test comparing a few mics. I don't remember all the mics but the cheap one was a SM58 and was compared against something like a U87. When people were asked which was the high end mic most people picked the 58.

Assuming that the average visitor to that site is amateur to semi-pro, it might back up ubertar's statement - people like what they are comfortable and familiar with.

Hardly scientific but interesting results.

[tfred812]

I'm an aging analog buff and not inherently hostile to the argument, but ...

How do today's mp3s compare to the heavily EQed and specially mastered 45s from the golden age of pop? Esp as they were played over AM radios? I'd think mp3s would sound better, but I haven't A-Bed them. But that's the analogy I think of when the discussion turns to mp3 quality.

I learned to love the Beach Boys from scratchy 45s and LPs from Amvets, and it didn't stop me from later loving the DVD-A version of Pet Sounds. And I don't recall Brian Wilson or the Beatles complaining about their respective mastering engineers or the limitations they imposed on their vision. Rather, they seemed to rise to the challenge of creating of records that succeeded in the most popular format at the time (and in the process sometimes challenged their engineers to do better).

Also, the teenage audiophiles I knew as a teenager had lousy taste in music, and I don't think I'd trust one today.

[fossiltooth]

I'm an aging analog buff and not inherently hostile to the argument, but ...

How do today's mp3s compare to the heavily EQed and specially mastered 45s from the golden age of pop? Esp as they were played over AM radios? I'd think mp3s would sound better, but I haven't A-Bed them. But that's the analogy I think of when the discussion turns to mp3 quality.

I learned to love the Beach Boys from scratchy 45s and LPs from Amvets, and it didn't stop me from later loving the DVD-A version of Pet Sounds. And I don't recall Brian Wilson or the Beatles complaining about their respective mastering engineers or the limitations they imposed on their vision. Rather, they seemed to rise to the challenge of creating of records that succeeded in the most popular format at the time (and in the process sometimes challenged their engineers to do better).

Also, the teenage audiophiles I knew as a teenager had lousy taste in music, and I don't think I'd trust one today.

Yep.

(Most) people like what they're used to. It's familiar and comforting.

Yep yep.

[CarlosEs]

I wish I could hand out good speakers/monitors like food rations.

[rwc]

MP3s don't sizzle.

Flawed from the start.

[RefD]

MP3s don't sizzle.

Flawed from the start.

128kbps = distorted triggered flange on everything over 9khz?

[vvv]

128kbps = distorted triggered flange on everything over 9khz?

[uncle bastard]

My two penn'orth: most people don't care about quality, as long as they can hear the music. Kids especially, I know because the little bastards play shite from their mobiles everywhere; also because they haven't been around long enough to learn what good sound sounds like.