larryrup Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Maybe it's because of the business I'm in, but I define compression as fitting everything that is there into a smaller space. Zip files, Flac files etc., or as we call it lossless. MP3's and the like conflate data. They, arguably, with intelligence, throw out data to make the file smaller. So why aren't MP3 referred to as conflated ? Arguably, I could be considered one with little intelligence writing about such a trivial peve! Larry Link to comment
wgscott Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 They are smaller, and have superfluous data that audiophiles, in double-blind experiments, believe is inferior. So they should be referred to as deflated. Link to comment
Cebolla Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I wouldn't blame the audio world for the ambiguous meaning of compression. Computing handed that one out with lossy compressed image formats such as jpeg, decades ago. Just place the emphasis on lossy MP3 without even bothering with the word compression and then there's no confusion. We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us. -- Jo Cox Link to comment
souptin Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I wouldn't blame the audio world for the ambiguous meaning of compression. Computing handed that one out with lossy compressed image formats such as jpeg, decades ago. Just place the emphasis on lossy MP3 without even bothering with the word compression and then there's no confusion. Noooo! Don't even go there! Pedants are circling in circles around us ready to pounce on stray tautologies. Link to comment
Cebolla Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Oh come off it Soupy, the OP started that one by calling Flac & Zip lossless. Oops, see now you made me do it this time! We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us. -- Jo Cox Link to comment
Allan F Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Noooo! Don't even go there! Pedants are circling in circles around us ready to pounce on stray tautologies. Worse than vultures, or just about the same? "Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron Link to comment
Musicophile Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Maybe it's because of the business I'm in, but I define compression as fitting everything that is there into a smaller space. Zip files, Flac files etc., or as we call it lossless. MP3's and the like conflate data. They, arguably, with intelligence, throw out data to make the file smaller. So why aren't MP3 referred to as conflated ? Arguably, I could be considered one with little intelligence writing about such a trivial peve! Larry There are two types of changes that could be called compression. The Zipping or Flac conversion doesn't actually change the underlying data. Whether this changes the sound has been debated at eternam without a conclusion. The compression that is referred to in the "loundness war" debate refers to reducing the dynamic range of the music, or to overly simplify making the quiter passages of the music louder. This is usually done to most modern music to allow for better playback on a larger variety of players from an Ipod to your car stereo, but shunned by audiophiles, and I don't think anybody would disagree that it changes the sound. Dynamic range compression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Check out my blog at musicophilesblog.com - From Keith Jarrett to Johannes Brahms Link to comment
Allan F Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 The compression that is referred to in the "loundness war" debate refers to reducing the dynamic range of the music, or to overly simplify making the quiter passages of the music louder. This is usually done to most modern music to allow for better playback on a larger variety of players from an Ipod to your car stereo, but shunned by audiophiles, and I don't think anybody would disagree that it changes the sound. +1 except for the phrase "better playback". Perhaps "to better adapt to the environment" would be more appropriate. "Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron Link to comment
esldude Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 MP3's could be called compacted, like compaction, like trash compacter. Not exactly the same, occupying a smaller space, but for most purposes close enough to the same. But what the flac do I know? And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
bluesman Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Worse than vultures, or just about the same? It doesn't matter - either way, pedanticism is for the birds. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now