Are Audiophiles "Simply Guessing?"


Comments by Pro Musician, Rick Beato written by Robert Archer / CEPro:

https://www.cepro.com/article/pro_musician_rick_beato_audiophiles_guessing


"File size and equipment choice don’t matter"

"Training is the biggest factor when it comes to critically evaluating music"

Here is the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgEjI5PZa78

Came by this while searching for related material. Thoughts? Reaction?
david_ten
As I said, this is something I came upon. I find his video discussion interesting, but flawed. 

The comment section below Beato's YouTube Video is interesting and has some valuable contributions.

It does (for me) raise the question as to where each of our personal limits are and whether our limits should be driving our equipment and system choices?
Post removed 
I pretty much agree. 320 Kbps and higher is where it is starts to get tough to tell the difference on higher resolution. I think you can on some music tracks but on many pop/rock you can’t with an A or B test. Classical tracks with large dynamic range and acoustic instruments are easiest. Training also helps because you know exactly what to listen for.

This is very different from equipment.

I am continually surprised that the latest electronic equipment with SNR of -130db sounds better than -105 dB (the gold standard for years) because both are so damn good! I think it is because we rarely optimize the audio chain by listening close to maximum volume. So if you listen typically at -60 dB on the volume control the -130 dB gear is going to still sound near perfect while the -105 dB gear is going to have some noise that masks some details. (At -60dB, the -130 dB system has a dynamic range of 70dB left while the -105 dB system has a mere 45 dB above the noise floor).

This is what Alan Parsons says

https://www.cepro.com/article/beatles_pink_floyd_engineer_alan_parsons_rips_audiophiles






Alan Parsons is a favorite of mine and I own all his albums on vinyl, but the statement ' I don’t listen to much music recreationally - it’s almost always for professional applications' poses a credibility issue for this thread.I do believe its to do with a heightened level of concentration that audiophiles achieve with their own systems, when you reach that magic point where you are absolutely linked to the sound, experience, and emotion of the music you are playing.
1. There is a lot more to music reproduction than just the high frequencies. Speed, decay, tone, pace, spatial cues, etc. Listening ability and experience may be more important than acuity and frequency range in determining “quality” of reproduction.  That said, it is possible or even likely that different age ears find different presentations more pleasing that others.
2.  Agree ability to distinguish differences in sound reproduction is equipment dependent.  Which is essentially the purpose of this site.
3.  I have found some 128kbps music files sound more pleasing to me than double that because of the remix for the lower resolution, but that is highly track dependent and I definitely could hear a difference in any case.
4. Generally I find I like the sound of higher res digital music files better than redbook or mp3s, and find they sound closer to good quality vinyl than lesser res digital files, and this is listening across several different systems.  YMMV.

kn