←back to thread

431 points dangle1 | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.26s | source
1. jfvinueza ◴[] No.41862752[source]
The article mentions how deeply compressed the files we played were back then, but I'm pretty sure nowadays it's even worse.
replies(1): >>41863048 #
2. EmilyHughes ◴[] No.41863048[source]
Not at all. Any song on youtube uploaded in the last 5-10 years is as good as a 320 kbit mp3. Why would it be with the bandwidth anyone has to today?
replies(3): >>41863150 #>>41864148 #>>41866587 #
3. hedgehog ◴[] No.41863150[source]
Even limiting the scope to MP3 at the same bitrates modern encoders are much better than what we had back in the 90s.
4. jccalhoun ◴[] No.41864148[source]
I think the poster is confusing/conflating dynamic range compression with file compression
5. shiroiushi ◴[] No.41866587[source]
Obviously you've never listened to SiriusXM.

But seriously, the poster is probably complaining about how most modern music is heavily compressed in dynamic range, so that it sounds better on crappy earbud headphones and smartphone speakers.