File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
/hr/ I need you to diagnose me.

For the last few months I have felt a growing urge to have all my media in the highest quality possible. I only download Blu Ray movies (or at the very least Blu Ray rips), I have to have all my music in FLAC format and I listen to them on audiophile headphones. Also, my images must be high res which is why I lurk here so much.

Can this newfound obsession with only the best manifest itself in other aspects of my life? Is this a good thing? Does anon suffer from a similar need for perfection?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
how does this make you feel?
>> Anonymous
>>432067

It makes me die a little inside. I'm serious. I can hardley even listen to an mp3 without cringing.
>> Anonymous
>>432068
i feel for you man...kinda. all music from monotone cell phone rings to dolby digital theatres sound the same to me
>> sufi pk_x !!MgYe24ZHfRC
Don't worry, you're just like most other audiophile faggots
diagnosis:
1) you have too much money to spend
2) you are insecure, and want respect because you spend more money than others on gear
3) you should kill yourself

solution:
find something useful to do with your life.
>> Anonymous
Some form of OCD.

Also, did your father touch you when you were younger?
>> Anonymous
how do you get all your music in flac?
>> Anonymous
>>432084

i transcode it from mp3
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>432066
HOW DOES THIS MAKE YOU FEEL, BITCH?
>> Anonymous
>>432066
I HAVE EVEN MORE BUT I'M NOT GOING TO UPLOAD THEM OUT OF BITTERNESS.
EAT A DICK.
>> Anonymous
>>432084
usenet is a good place for that.

>>432090
flac transcoded from mp3 doesn't make it any higher quality.

>>432066
I generally don't listen to music in .flac format unless it's classical music or something.
>> Anonymous
Protip: mp3 with a bitrate of 320 or higher is physiologically impossible to distinguish from lossless.
>> Anonymous
>>432090

OP here and this guy isnt me. I download my music from avax mainly.

>>432083

no my father didnt touch me

>>432095

unless you have the right equipment
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>432066
I know your pain man. I have become obsessed with having all my pics as hueg .png files and downloading my music in ogg vorbis format.
>> Anonymous
>>432176
Do you mean that you're actually COMPARING mp3 and lossless using OSCILLOSCOPE????
>> Anonymous
>>432176
I believe he meant to the human ear.. Not the right equipment
>> Anonymous
>>432237
most human ears probably can't tell the difference, but I'm sure well trained children could, especially if it were something like classical music.
>> Anonymous
>>432176
>unless you have the right equipment

At least that's what the guy who sold you your ridiculously overpriced shit told you. He certainly wouldn't steer you wrong like every other retailer that caters to audiophiles, no sir. You're the kind of person who pays $6/ft. for fucking cable, you may as well just burn your money.
>> Anonymous
>>432382

I didn't go through a store. I did all of my own research and bought online.
>> Anonymous
I wouldn't worry... what the other people here can't seem to fathom is that there really is no point in losing quality. Storage is extremely cheap these days, and if my entire music collection fits onto my hard drive in flac format without any issues then what's the point in making it mp3? Maybe you can't hear the difference, and it's just the knowledge that makes you think it sounds better, but so what?

And to those who are saying that you're being ripped off by spending more on equipment, do you really think that £50 speakers sound the same as £200 speakers? Sure expensive cables are a joke but that's not what anyone said.
>> Anonymous
>>432440

Thanks you. That pretty much sums up my feelings. Just the knowledge makes it worth having.
>> Anonymous
hai guise in this thread. i need someplace to download music vidoes in high quality. anyone can help?
>> Anonymous
>>432452

the fuck would you want to download music videos?
>> Anonymous
>>432453
guess i got too much storage space?
>> Anonymous
>>432460
now, be more specific
>> Anonymous
>>432287
Musically trained, classical music-listening anon here with a slightly beyond-normal hearing range.
Can't tell the difference between 320kbps MP3s and lossless formats made from vinyls or live recordings. Even with classical music, I don't begin to hear the noise until it's below 250kbps. And of course with rock, pop, and the like, 192 is usually good enough.
>> Anonymous
>>435307
What about electronic music?
>> Anonymous
i own shure se530's
>> Anonymous
>>432066

You sound like a perfectionist and I know what you mean.

I do have some bad news for you though, you probably know this, but even a blu ray release is probably not the highest quality possible. Digital cinema is captured at a much higher resolution than 1080p and film also has a higher resolution. You'll have to wait for whatever comes after blu ray (and perhaps even that won't suffice) for the absolute highest quality. And even then, that will only apply to current media.

Getting your music in FLAC is probably a good idea, although I'd rather just keep it in FLAC for archival purposes. Though, it would suck if this was only a downsampled version and in the future the best possible version was released. One good thing about getting the ideal version of something is that you don't have to get it again.

Getting your images from here may not be the best idea, although it is a step up from typical web content. Don't you think it's better to get it from the source? Even some images here have been scaled down.

Oh and if I'm not mistaken, many astronomical related images are ALWAYS scaled down immensely. Hubble images can be gigabytes in size, even losslessly compressed.
>> Anonymous
I hate FLAC files, when yo convert them straight up to mp4 they go form like 30mb to 90mb per song.
But where do you stand on hr porn(videos) because I can do without them.
>> Anonymous
>>435347
i don't even think the Hubble was capable of handling anything in the GB range given how old the clunker is. shit aint even a Pentium 1....
>> Anonymous
>>435747
That's because it is just some high powered mirrors, it is a telescope, not a camera.