Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Do Microsoft?sCopilot+ PCs Require Linux?
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 14:21:40 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <v2ss5k$2t7vu$9@dont-email.me>
References: <v2k7km$12v2d$1@dont-email.me>
 <qnbu4j1li5mgjm6gm0l5o3kvku94179t9u@4ax.com>
 <QNWdnbsVQuRa29L7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@supernews.com>
 <jd5v4jh01l2cobjil6k7tjpuj6g8ricb1q@4ax.com>
 <SXCdnZlYANrgJ9L7nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@supernews.com>
 <v2oefk$1unm9$1@dont-email.me> <v2oiao$1vg9l$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2olmo$1vp5q$1@dont-email.me> <v2pdu5$27a5s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2pvo9$2ae8o$6@dont-email.me> <v2q198$2ass0$1@dont-email.me>
 <f7l35jhg8n80a8ha65gb3evt3atqfjvuq2@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 16:21:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f67987470a1cda29a6913d1a571732b";
	logging-data="3055614"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Q2N+hEsU/gxcEz34kt2SC"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:j+ie0bh11k6NWsZFEyG9+4oaUck=
Bytes: 3109

On 2024-05-25, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>>>
>>> The ears are one thing, but even if you only know about the 
>>> specifications, you would know that what Spotify offers can't compete. 
>>> Apple's lossy codec is the best there is, so a song encoded at 256kbps 
>>> using it will sound magnificent no matter what kind of speakers you use. 
>>> If that is not sufficient for you, it also offers lossless at no extra 
>>> charge. Meanwhile, the default for Spotify is AAC at 128kbps, using an 
>>> inferior codec that is probably the one offered by Nero. High quality 
>>> there is 256kbps, more or less on par with what Apple Music offers at 
>>> the low end but, again, with a worse encoder. There is no lossless option.
>>
>>But is the "loss" noticeable to human ears?
>
> Especially for us old folks.  Most the "savings" in lossy compression
> is a reduction in high frequencies.  I'm more concerned with audio
> quality than most people are, and I think that Spotify's sound quality
> is quite good.  But then, I'm old.
>
> I think that I can still tell that my CD's are better, if they are
> mastered well.  OTOH, some of my old rock CD's have terrible mastering
> (very little bass) and I find Spotify's mastering to be much better!

I can hear some difference in quality also. Some of the old music I like 
from the 70s gets remastered and re-released and I'm often interested in the 
those CDs / MP3s. 

-- 
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an 
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality." 
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..."     — St. Augustine