Are CD's "better" than mp3's? (FORUM: MiniDisc VS MP3)

Member Name: lkingman

Product:	FORUM: MiniDisc VS MP3
Date:	07/05/02 (330 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Compact file size, No more discs to buy

Disadvantages: MP3 player may be more expensive than mini disc

I offer the following for the possibility that it might help those who love music and who are new to mp3's ...

Question your assumptions: A number of posts, including one found currently on this site, contain a flat statement such as "CD sound is better than mp3". Well, maybe not ...

In June/2000, a German magazine name C't published the results of a double blind experiment testing if CD could be distinguished from mp3, playback. I have not seen an English translation yet, the original German article may be found at: http://www.heise.de/ct/00/06/092/default.shtml. A critique of it's methodology with some English may be found at: http://sjeng.sourceforge.net/audio/heise.html.

They test involved 14 individuals including members of the audiophile community, double blind. The results simply stated are these ...

While 90% of the mp3's encoded at 128k were detected, mp3's encoded at 256k were found to be indistinguishable from the CD's.

So I suggest that to say that CD's sound better than mp3's, without qualification, is not quite accurate.

A test was also done by Stereo Review not between CD's and mp3's but comparing different CODEC's, finding mp3 performance slipping below that of two competing CODEC's. It has been longer than I want to say since my college statistics classes, but instinct causes me concern about their methodology ...

1. The results are based upon three subjects.

2. The three subjects themselves were Microsoft, Frauhofer and Dolby Labs employees. Double blind though the test may have been, my instinct causes me to question the use of subjects who are so familiar with the nuances/idiosynchracies of each CODEC. For example, was one sound "better/worse" or was it simply recognizable? I believe it is preferable to use disinterested subjects as the C't test did.

I'm an audio tweak of some thirty
years. I just spent $750 on a phono cartridge (moderate by audiophile standards). I listen to vinyl and CD. I have been told all my life how picky and obsessive I am. I have spent hours replaying the same 5-10 second segment from an CD-to-aiff file, then from a 256k mp3 of that file, back and forth ad nauseum. I do not think I could pick out the CD vs the mp3 in a double blind test any better than the C't subjects did.

I'm archiving my vinyl and CD's at 256K CBR/normal stereo or 128K for mono. This gives me 80 archive quality hours on my iPod. But I'm not throwing away the aiff files or the CD's. Who knows what's coming next? Always expect the unexpected.

I hope this helps.

PS. recommendation/warning as may be the case: try an iPod and you will never be able to settle for a mini disc.

Happy listening!

Summary: