Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Yet another AAC thread

Yet another AAC thread (Page 2)
Thread Tools
zigzag
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2003, 10:33 AM
 
Originally posted by Sherwin:
No, what I was saying is that if you don't perceive a difference then why spend time testing for it. Subtle but important difference.
That goes without saying. The issue only arises when other people make claims and I want to verify those claims before spending my money/time. This could be true of anything from your claim to the $10,000 speaker cables advertised in the audio magazines.

If you feel the requirement to do a blind test, go and do one. Get iT 3 and iT 4 on two computers and get someone to A/B them for you. There's no point in me doing one 'coz you need to hear it for yourself to believe it.
I agree - I already said that it isn't your obligation to do such a test. Experience has just taught some of us to be skeptical about all of the claims that we read and hear about.

A final observation from a logical viewpoint... Why would I be saying that iT 3 was better than iT 4 if I was letting expectations and suggestions get in the way? I eagerly await those lovely little check boxes in Software Update like the rest of you, with the anticipation, expectation and (possible) auto-suggestion that the new softs will be somehow better than the current ones.
Surely the powers of auto-suggestion would favour iT 4 (bigger, better, newer)?
That's a good point - you're going against expectations. But, again, experience has taught me to be skeptical, mostly for three reasons: (a) you're the first person to mention it; (b) I'm not aware of any technical explanation for the phenomenon, and (c) people perceive qualitative differences for all kinds of reasons, e.g. slight differences in gain. Blind testing is one way of addressing this. You can say that it's redundant/unnecessary, but the fact is that human perception is a fickle thing and over the years blind testing has disproved a number of things that people were "sure of."

Again, I haven't said that you're wrong. Maybe MP3 encoding is, in fact, "way better" in iT3 than iT4. This didn't start with me challenging your claim - it was you who challenged the validity of blind testing and suggested that people who would rely on it must have crap for ears.
( Last edited by zigzag; Aug 31, 2003 at 11:08 AM. )
     
qnxde
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2003, 08:47 PM
 
Also make sure you're using the latest version of iTunes 4, itunes 4.0 had this weird bug where it messed with the volume levels partway through a song and it sounded TERRIBLE.

You can't eat all those hamburgers, you hear me you ridiculous man?
     
 
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:40 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,