Karaoke Forums

Oh, I believe it.

After all, when you have people who claim they can hear the difference in 6 foot RCA cables, you will get them to believe they can hear a difference in anything.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I am an EE, and I would have to state that you are incorrect in a couple of ways.

1) Though MP3s and CDGs are both digital, the DENSITY of information on professionally made hard media is what gives it the ability to record the nuance and harmonics that an MP3 can't. Plus MP3 files are specifically made to store data within certain parameters of average human hearing, whereas CDGs are not so bounded, meaning that audiophiles witha good ear can hear the difference. To me they sound flat and bodiless.


2) If you were to put an oscilliscope on an MP3 sound source, you will ALWAYS- no matter how it was downloaded or made- find random dropouts, compressions, keyshifts, and speed changes. No matter what.


3) There is absolutely no quality control on MP3s. It all depends on the abilities of the uploading invidual, the transmission media of the uploader, the processing ability of the device it's been uploaded to, the ability of the downloading individual, the transmission media of the downloader, the processing ability of the download device. Then you have to wonder HOW MANY TIMES the MP3 goes through this ( keeping in mind the the individuals mentioned are almost ALL amateurs) before YOU get it. Once in your PC, the actual output of sound and graphics is dependent on your sound and video cards. CDG players are specifically made FOR THIS PURPOSE.

A disc is mastered, then copied ONCE at optimum speed at a PROFESSIONAL recording manufacturer. Each disc is exactly the same, and excluding physical damage due to mishandling, will never change, hence the reason for hard media.
Quality control.

Not only have I yet to see a top mfr. go totally digital, many, such as Sound Choice and Stellar ( was Top Hits Monthly, now Chart Hits Monthly), have actually STOPPED producing digital releases.

I work and live in Bergen County, NJ, one of the two most affluent places in the U.S. Despite the propaganda- in my area, at least- you will almost NEVER see a laptop at a top end event.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

That's all very well Joe, but I have yet to meet a sound engineer in a karaoke bar with an oscilliscope looking like he's ready to kick off about my lack of body..
Usually I find a crowd of people with human ears out to have a drink, sing a few songs & have some fun.

Plus in a crowded loud bar, i'm not worried about the one audiophile that MAY be able to tell the difference. I've heard PLENTY of disc based shows that had horrid PA operators & it wouldn't have mattered if they were discs or the worst quality mp3, the sound was that bad. A good rip over a good PA & someone that knows how to run it, the majority-all would not be able to tell the difference.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

Well, I also have a BSEE and I will again have to say it all depends on. The sampling rate on the CD is 44KHz, that means there are 44,000 bits of samples being detected every second. If you take a 192K sampling of MP3, you are over sampling the existing raw digital data from CDs. The conversion never goes through A/D/A process, MP3 just takes the raw digital data and applies the compression algorithm on the digital data. So, it all depends on the compression CODEC you use.

Of course the sound waves will be different from raw uncompressed data of CD from compressed MP3. However, if you do look at the sound wave from higher bit sampled MP3 with the right CODEC, let's say LAME which is preferred by many DJs and so on, then you will not see that much difference between the raw and the MP3. There are really crappy encoders out there and that gave the MP3 a bad name but just because the music is compressed, it does not mean it's inferior.

_________________

Seize the day and SING!!!

You did, and there is a lowere limit too. If someone has sensitive enough hearing, this is a major reason for noticing the difference in quality, along with others.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Jian, you missed my point. Even .wav files are not EQUAL to CDs, whether I hear it or not. The testing equipment says so. But let's say they are. Hell let's say MP3s are.

NO ONE SAYS THEY ARE SUPERIOR- NO ONE. So why should I change over? The "convenience"? I'm afraid that is negated by the cost of hardware, software, software glitches and incompatability, hardware that is NOT MADE specifically for the purpose of sound production,more susceptability to all kinds of things that can destroy the files, time involved for ripping discs ( and complete lack of quality control if you are downloading instead of ripping).....all this to use a source that isn't even better, and in real life electronically inferior.

As previously posted, I truly believe digital music is a bridge technology, and will wait for a superior media, which will have to be hard media, at least for QC purposes alone.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."