Music Listeners Test 128kbps vs. 256kbps AAC

notthatwillsmith writes "Maximum PC did double-blind testing with ten listeners in order to determine whether or not normal people could discern the quality difference between the new 256kbps iTunes Plus files and the old, DRM-laden 128kbps tracks. But wait, there's more! To add an extra twist, they also tested Apple's default iPod earbuds vs. an expensive pair of Shure buds to see how much of an impact earbud quality had on the detection rate."

Comments

Re:Cost and quality

[snowgirl]

I have a friend who claims to be an audiophile - and he is - with sound equipment worth well over $40,000.

Clearly your friend has too much money... My music is not so important to me that I would spend more on it than your average sports car...

IANAL

[Bossk-Office]

I am not a lamer, so I've never bought any iTunes music. I had no idea it was encoded at 128 kb/s! (I guess it's something other than MP3 so my experience is not entirely relevant, but it's got to be comparable.) The recent Apple products I've used have all been of impressive quality, so I'm surprised they of all people are peddling such crappy audio. I don't exactly have golden ears, and going above 192 kb/s in an MP3 never makes any difference to me, but if it's a 128, I can spot that within seconds and throw it away. If it's got cymbals in it, ugh!