[pulseaudio-discuss] Hardware support, resampling, bit-for-bit

[Tanu Kaskinen]

On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 11:57 +0200, CC wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm curious -- do you notice a perceivable difference between the two?
> 
> 
> I haven't built the system yet. I'd like to set it up correctly the first
> time.
> 
> I would assume to not notice a difference right away. I imagine it similar
> to getting used to MP3 compression: at first, you don't notice anything
> weird with 128kbps, then you learn to recognize the artifacts, then you hate
> them. Or pictures that are blurry because they were resized and not
> postprocessed. I guess generically the best resampling filter is a windowed
> sinc filter, and I know that they are noticeable in image processing. I
> don't know yet if it's noticeable in audio, though.

I have always thought that it works the other way around - if you're
used to CD quality, you'll easily get annoyed by 128 kbps MP3 files, but
over time you'll get used to it and don't notice it anymore. I think
there was even a study that found out that young people who have been
listening mostly to the poor quality MP3 files for their whole life,
actually don't like better quality audio - they complain that it's
missing the artifacts that they have been used to.

I believe the best way to find out whether you can tell any difference
between resampled and non-resampled is to make a setup where you can
quickly switch between them and try to hear the difference. For more
reliable results, do it with a friend so that only he knows which mode
is being selected. (Or turn it into science and do double blind
testing...)

-- 
Tanu