PUT DOWN THE Q-TIP AND WALK AWAY

I used to be one of these "big ass sensitive ear" people. Or I thought I was. For years I'd sided with the audiophiles, that mp3s were ruining music and the enjoyment of good clear production, etc. And then I did a very thorough comparison by ripping tracks in three forms - wav, mp3, and aac at varying bitrates and made myself really listen closely to see if it was just this vague, indefinable hatred for lossy-compressed files learned by hanging out with other sensitive-eared people or if it was truly because they sounded awful. I came back having to eat tasty crow - 160kbs mp3s and 128kbs aac sounded just fine in almost every case. End result? I listen almost exclusively to my Ipod, bought after I had to concede that there was nothing evil going on with lossy compression. I also had to admit what everyone else had been saying: if mp3s and their ilk were so awful sounding, they wouldn't be popular like they are (don't get me wrong, they'd still be popular - free is a great concept that overrides things like "quality." They just wouldn't be as seemingly all-consumingly popular as they are today.) Ah, well, lesson learned: do your research first before taking an insistent stance on something.

Radio is still very "popular" and it often sounds horrible. But it is understood that it is a transient, temporary form of music, and people don't mind hearing clipped frequencies or mono sound. When I buy something to keep forever, though, I want it to be the most pristine sound available. Although I'm not a vinyl guy I respect the dedication vinyl aficionados possess.

And I don't have anything against MP3s, I still listen to them all the time while at the PC or at work. But I don't think a 128kbs MP3 sounds nearly as sharp as a CD track, especially when played on descent stereo equipment. Burn a CD from 128kbs mp3s and try it - you'll hear a difference.