...well that explains why this style felt familiar.

Was definitely just thinking the same thing 😭

It's not as good as the normal tech quicky

But these guys aren't abnoxious gay libtards, so its better

@@chloebaloneyxx Lmao wrong they legit are 😂

lmao

excuse me wtf

@@Sataka23clips Don made a console peasant impression as a joke. Also, before someone comments, there's a difference between console players and console peasants. Console players play on consoles because they like them. Console peasants religiously defend consoles. Summary: All console peasants are console players but not all console players are console peasants.

@@HazmatPyro aren't the 'PC master race' the only ones who say things like this? I've never really got it myself...but I play console games and don't care as long as the game frame rate isn't choppy and it's in 1080p.

Then download more ram.

dude, lmao. Would indeed have been an amazing detail and it's a real damn shame all it is is a missed opportunity now.. I demand this video get rerecorded with beats headphones!

i was waiting for that...

Lawsuit?

probably because they're too expensive lol (that or copyrights)

@@Xamarin491 too expensive... Linus acquired two 48 port 10 gigabit switches. You try telling him Beats headphones are too expensive (he uses IE80s too).

One of my favorite videos by them to date, it was hilarious.

Damn.. I thought that was a regular wanker, wtf

@@PiousSlayer What video was it?

Is he/she Linus? OMG

@@UlyssesM "Cat Ear Headphones - Kickass or KickFart?"

so I'm not the only one who noticed does that mean I can be an audiophile?

very@@MikeDolar1

Nick Wallace I thought I was going crazy

I didn't even notice.

so is it normal to notice those small things? or is it something wrong with me

OMG i laughed for 3 minutes straight

#Lemos!

@@MichaelBerthelsen no

@@ivankindle3 No, what?

This led me to search for Emu pictures. Looks like that might also be a costume worth trying out…

because everyone clicked away from this cringe fest before it started.

@@jeffrydemeyer5433 Angry self professed "audiophile" has entered the chat. lol

You new here? believe me we've seen better!

@@mtsb6285 :P

I thought he was going to say “this video is sponsored by Bugatti” lmao

Kamex pretty late, but might as well comment. On real good quality headphones, you can hear the difference ALOT. They are “an insult to the producer” but as a drummer, being a able to have those small music queues while blasting away is a huuuge bonus and makes stuff a lot easier.

Let me correct Sushi’s comment, on real good quality headphones, you can hear the difference A TINY LITTLE BIT. It’s really fucking little on even the best equipment in studio environments. 320kbps mp3 with a good codex is still the best compression to sound quality there possibly is.

I hate the fact that it seems like even universities push the false believe that "MP3 is unlistenable". It would have been much more educational if your class would have done a listening session in a studio (I bet your university got something like that) to actually hear the difference for yourself.

There is a difference. Not all equipment will expose the differences. Not everyone can hear the differences. Those that can not hear the difference act like the people that can hear the difference are claiming to have seen ghosts.

@@mrq1701 No, it’s more like people claiming that these differences are so big that you’re stupid for not hearing it are idiots who believe in psychoacoustic bullshit. Literally any reputable A/B testing with even experienced listeners shows that the differences between flac and mp3 are really not that discernible. I should know more than most, I have a 600 gig music collection that’s 99% flac, the differences are all in your head buddy.

༄Rod you got it right!

Totally

It's a good format but I can't agree it's more dynamic then the good'old white background. It feels slow compared to the usual format.

@@seeckergaming I agree, it does feel slower

true but honestly linus.... 2:09

Have you ever done that? The bitrate is amazing, you don't know what you're missing

@@deathbydeviceable you don't know what you're doing.

@@sadmansaquib1146 r/wooosh

Your doing it wrong, everyone knows upscaling 240p to 8K is stupid and you won't get the benefits. You need to upscale 240 to 480, the 480 to 720, then 720 to 1080, then 1080 to 4K and THEN 4K to 8K!! I mean DUH!! ;) hehe

Converting youtube to lossless would not be like upscaling 240p to 8k, it would be like 240p to 240p. You would get whatever bitrate it was on youtube, hence the name lossless (no loss of quality) So if youtube is 160 kbps then a lossless would get you 160 kbps

I love it too

i think he could play the part of joey in friends well

No, there's actually a lot of misinformation here. Not to mention the "budget" headphones they showed were all terrible options at their prices.

@@Boardwoards can you point out the lot of misinformation here? except the budget headphones recommendation (which actually the best of each category, not the best of sound but ok)

So HE'S The Friend who gave bed boy his lossless Taylor Swift tracks!

Well made in the regard that they have no idea what they're talking about?

L同意Y(^_^)Y

That's bullshit. They even didn't included Bitrate comparisons for modern codecs

Listening to CD-ripped FLACs with Bluetooth headphones is still a very good experience.

Bluetooth can support high bitrates now, thanks to ldac

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kLNiocuhx5uVY2w.html

@@afiqaurora5056 but how good is the connectivity?

How to I get my headphones to support ldac?

I REALLY hope this is a joke.

@@StephenFasciani no, Beats is literally one of the most expensive pieces of paperweights on the planet. Second only to diamond rings, I daresay. But on the contrary to OP, I wouldn't say doing so would've made the representation more accurate, because Beats artificially distorts the analog sound data it gets with its own drivers, something that most sound equipment just doesn't do intentionally. I mean, yes, beats users think they know a lot about hearing good music when they're literally listening to (assumedly) former art distorted into trash, and these people wouldn't be able to distinguish the sound difference and the deep nuance of the music... But Beats is terrible for an entire different plethora of reasons, not just the inability to properly portray more detailed music from higher bitrates, which would take away from the message of the video, instead of enhancing.

@@SlaaneshiKitty I knew beats were bad, but I had no clue they f'd with the audio before they even reached the driver.

@@TheGreatMcPain beats, like many headphones, (at least the Bluetooth ones) have their own built in DAC. Analog Sound IS affected by both interference (beats have horrible build quality, so even if the distance from DAC to driver is very small, there is very little shielding against interference) and by the way that the DAC interprets the Digital data itself. I can't say for sure whether it is the drivers only or a combination of the driver and the DAC that does the sound distortion in the case of beats, but the lows are muffled and overly reverberating, the highs are screechy and everything in between is muffled. In any case, the problem with beats is that all of this sound profile changes are 100% intentional, which is the exact opposite of what Hi-fi is supposed to do.

@@SlaaneshiKitty Okay, I understand that wireless versions usually suck, because of crappy builtin DACs/Amps, but I was wondering if they slapped in some filters to screw with their wired versions, such as the Solo 2.

YES I love it to, very refreshing.

There is something about the style I didnt like, but cant tell what. Aside from the obvious with how it feels very very scripted with subpar actors actually doing acting (albeit tongue-in-cheek). This might be ironic considering the topic of the video, but I feel like what I disliked is somehow related to the audio changes between the actors + camera pans.

it was terrible linus shouldve been the guy on the bed

Want to know what rules more? Caaaaaarboooon nanooooo tuuubes!!

Are you from the netherlands?

It feels more 'personal'

I also it is a little sketch and information in one!

@Hyp3rNova56 The background is literally blue. Haven't u heard of bluelight filters.

Do you people not know how to turn your brightness down. Liek srsly. Turn on a light if nothing else.

@@flameshana9 yes but when dark mode exists. Why would anyone need to do that anymore? 😁

Riley Conover

That's what I was thinking it's like Adam ruins everything lol loved it

exactly my thoughts

But if you sit down, and enjoy music, you notice even instruments that could not hear before. It is not a drastic difference, but somehow it just sounds a bit clearer.

Unless you have OCD and ADHD like me so I hear literally every difference.

@@tander101 I hear things no one else does lol. Like the electric current from an outlet no one else hears. But if I record a video of it on my phone and play it back, everyone else can hear what I hear.

2:05 maybe leave a timestamp next time, it's easier to find

Can someone tell me what body pillow Linus holds on? I need it for... reasons.

@@ceherryflare3720 its yoko from the anime gurren lagann

I instantly go down to the comment section after seeing that LOL

@@ceherryflare3720 For science

eh it depends on what codec was used to downsample a lossless track into mp3 there are audible but not necessarily obvious difference. I personally use mp3 on my mobile devices (not like the internal decoder can take advantage of the higher bitrate) and flac for my home listening rig. I'm no snob tho, flac is my ceiling going wav to my own personal experience is mostly inaudible and a massive waste of internal storage.

For mp3 sure but if you're using the way better opus then 192 is basically indistinguishable from the original audio.

@@RealHomeRecording Might as well use 320kpbs. With how little space music takes up on modern devices i don't see a reason not too.

you know it's a parody, right?

@@erelpc a parody with good production quality

James sounded terrible compared to Riley. And that's using half-reasonable onboard audio and my 5 year old budget headset. I still find it interesting how many people didn't seem to notice.

what is "buggatti funds" *can't find any fun in this

@@andreasosowski7302 It's just an example of money gotten from consumers going towards buying that next expensive vehicle (in this case, a Bugatti). Not too much beyond that.

can you NOT? thanks

Can you see 144hz? prove it! Just showing how silly your mockery is. Of course some people notice the difference.

That's how Trump was elected

Ahov No you aren't, just because some people can doesn't mean everybody who says they can do. How about all those people running 200FPS on their 60hz monitor? Yes, a surprising number actually think it makes the image smoother. A lot of gamers know higher is better without understanding how or why, just like with bitrate.

You can hear the difference between 320 and flac on good equipment, it's just subtle. That's basically what the video said

You should try out the "Quick convert" option inside Foobar. Test out OPUS and Apple's AAC encoder. There's a difference between MP3/OGG (both 320 kbps) and a lossless audio file. But I believe you won't hear any between lossless and OPUS/AAC.

Yeah agreed

Aashish Thapa right which is probably why I like this so munch

@@AshKaijin I'm ok with this. Only thing they need to ruin is related to tech and I'm fine with it.

@Abstractism my old 2013 Xperia z1c's built in DAC still sounds better with a wider soundstage than my new xiaomi a1, though the latter is much louder and powers my m50x much louder. Its great though that entry-level DACs now are much better than entry-level ones back then -- but I also have 'vintage' 90s DACs that can perform on par as high-end ones now albeit being bigger. I wish DACs though like the audioquest dragonfly red gets built into motherboards, laptops, and phones lol. But I also understand that most people would pay at most 20USD for earphones, headphones, and speakers which would negate the dac's quality anyway. Thinking back, you're right, a 20usd pair of headphones or earphones today sound way better than similarly-priced earphones back then. I always recommend Sennheisers now at that price point but back then I recommended Creatives because they were bang for the back. Included earphones with phones too now sound similar to those 20usd ones when back then they sounded like cheap 1 dollar ones.

Human perception is a big one, I don't think most people know just how quickly adults lose the ability to differentiate high frequencies with age which effects overall waveform accuracy (as individual notes are a summation of multiple frequency wavelets). Electrostatic headphones are good for the higher frequencies but not common today

Dusty Carrier I can back this 👌🏻

Yeah the only reason I can think for using 324kHz files is for remastering or applying complex digital filters, I have no idea why any consumer would believe they're a good idea, or even 192kHz for that matter - especially through some airpods

@@hg-sf7yx there is only so far you can go before it is just diminishing returns. Once you get above 24 bits you can get a perfect recreation of the analogue sound wave and a better signal-to-noise ratio than any human could possibly hear - once you go past this point it is entirely plecebo effect. Even modest DACs can recreate almost perfect waveforms with lower bit depths. As I stated, high bit depths have their uses when processing the signals, but for the end listener it doesn't matter how good your equipment is, you're just increasing file size for zero benefit.

h g No, 192kHz is literally out of the range of human hearing. There’s a good reason why 44.1kHz and 48kHz are standard for audio and it has to do with mathematics and signal processing (20kHz being above the range of human hearing, a 40kHz sample rate would prevent aliasing, and then there’s a 10-20% cutoff margin). Now I don’t think it’s possible for someone to distinguish between a square wave and a sine wave at the upper end of their hearing (as upper harmonics would be out of hearing range), so the only reason that someone would need an audio clip with a frequency that high would be for editing or resampling purposes, as something like a 48kHz to 44.1kHz conversion may cause artifacts that a 192kHz to 44.1kHz conversion wouldn’t cause.

@@hg-sf7yx You'd need to be an audiophile with quite literally superhuman hearing. 48kHz is already slightly better quality than 99.9% are capable of actually hearing...and the few that remain fall off very quickly after that.

They compressed James's voice so one could get an example/idea of what compressed audio sounds like compared to "good" audio.

i didn't catch it

I would think so, Riley's voice was suuuuper crisp while every time James talked I wanted it to end

​@@mikes2381 James' voice sounded like 16kbps compared to Riley's 128 kbps.

From Here kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nr2ZkrVo3Lyxpnk.html

Dude I made a huge audible wtf.... With the yoko pillow and everything.

So you haven't seen the original video with "emo Linus"? It's not new, though.

Will Nerone flac is good as fuck 🤣

TTA and TAK are way better in saving space from PCM conversions. Unfortunately TAK isn't open source and if it was FLAC would be left to rot.

Yup. The difference between mp3@320 and flac is just night and day. Perhaps not SO much for hip hop as there's not much to it, but come any form of acoustics or whatever and then it's just not satisfying listening to an mp3

Can I join too with my barbaric wav? Storage is cheaper than a new head

@@SpecialEDy Whatever you want man. ..we got plenty of room for your fatass wavs. 😃

JPEG's, right? 🤣

Yikes ENHANCE

but...but they do it on CSI

I mean, there's a ton of neural-net image scalers out there that work pretty well. They won't add any extra details but they'll make existing objects look cleaner on hi-rez displays than standard scaling. Reddit's wallpaper subs frequently use these to scale between formats.

@@peter.s.3207 Researchers also trained some models to enhance image quality by feeding photos taken by low-end smartphones and DSLRs. Software today is just unbelievable

No one can hear frequencies above 20 kHz, but it's not that 48 kHz has a lot emptiness between 20.5 kHz and 24 kHz. The sound is just stretched out. The slight difference would be only in the bass area, because low frequencies require more space on the frequency axis, which can be seen on a spectogram. When working with audio files you usually work at 96 kHz sampling rate, because you don't want loose much data, when stretching and changing the pitch. The finished sound file for listening is then converted to 48 or 44.1 kHz. Modern PC's run at 48 kHz, KZfaq saves their audio files at 48 kHz (that's the nature of OPUS files), 48 kHz was called the DVD quality in the past. 48 kHz is just the new standard for over a decade now.

* tech quickie

dude, it's a joke. omg lol

coat hanger? why not just use aluminum wire? it's the worst you can get so if you're doing a test then it would be a good candidate. CCA vs OFC

Keep this comment at 69 likes

I had nearly the exact same setup (just non BT) for few years up til few months ago, my E17 would not connect to anything via usb anymore so I upgraded to schiit magni & modi and recently replaced headphones with beyerdynamic c.o.ps

Hit up massdrop for the HD6xx or HD58x. I have the he4xx and hd6xx... And i cant honestly say i prefer one over the other, but the 58x are cheaper, and some say, better, than the 6xx and 4xx

so true

Linus Ruins Everything Tech

@@freakfreak12345 Riley Ruins Everything

Linus Drops Everything

But still. From 1TB of FLAC files, you can go down to 300 GB AAC at 256 kbps, and you won't loose much quality. And it's sounding better then 320 kbps OGG that is used on Spotify.

T4iga It’s amazing that lossless makes a difference on bluetooth. The extremes just sound a lot better, wider soundstage, it really amazed me how much of a difference it makes. But then again, we’re in the minority that actually enjoys listening for these bits

Do you have sound normalization turned on on Spotify, because 320kbps Vorbis sounds exactly the same to Tidal’s Master quality. You may be saying this because of the preamp that Tidal has that bumps songs up by a decibel or two to make everything seem clearer than Spotify, when in reality the compression is still there. Then again I’m comparing these two against my actual flac collection, streaming just will never get you the best sound quality and that’s ok. Spotify’s algorithm and selection is just miles better anyway, so whatever difference there is doesn’t make up for Tidal’s shit capabilities as a streaming app. EDIT: I should’ve said that sound normalization should be off on Spotify in the settings, and the highest quality setting on. With this considered, in an ABX setting, there are no audible differences EXCEPT on classical and jazz, even on good equipment.

Noticed that too. Ironic.

It was done on purpose in James' case. Dude's listening to low-end headphones, his voice is low quality. See what they did there?

sounds fine to me on my freebie unbranded headphones

Different recording quality between James and Riley.

One you get that high it is pretty hard to tell the diff. Plus lossy compression is getting better..especially AAC. I have all my music backed up in FLAC and convert to lossy for phone/pc use.. whatever. It's nice to have lossless backups so as time goes on and better lossy compression comes out you can always take advantage.

James? Discount luke :P but yeah, i dont know if it was made on purpose, because he sounds like he has low bitrate lol

Must be on purpose, they usually do much better than that. :) My sound system isn't AMAZING!1! ..but it's good enough to know that was pretty bad.

I feel like they were riding the line between "talking down to the audiance" and "intentionally doing a cheesy parody of those PSA videos that talk down to the audiance". The problem was they were a little too close to the line and it felt less like a parody and more like a bland PSA. Would have been better if they were more self referential about how cheesy this style of PSA format is.

Wasn’t Linus emo enough parody for you?

audiophools need to be talked down to. they do enough talking down themselves

that does seem like an overkill amount of money to pay just to listen to your favorite songs, but having good equipment is not a waste. all you really need for your music to sound good is a midrange DAC with a midrange pair of headphones/speakers and amp.

@@ElectronicsForFun How come hardware that has dolby atmos/dts X processors cost so much? Is this related to why PC sound cards supporting those formats dont exist?

I feel like you were doing something wrong... Also, you spent thousands on drivers? wat?

@@Alanreaks35 To get a quality AVR reciever to support all of those channels you're going to need to spend $1000+. If you're running a home theater with all of that that's a lot of amplification you're going to need. You'll also wind up buying external amps for at least the front channels. I still run a 5.1 setup because it's perfect for the size of the room. I do plan on moving up to 7.2 when I get to move ot in a larger room. I don't think PCs will support Dolby Atmos or DTS because of the high bandwidth. I've only seen those formats on Blu-ray.

Well, I have a receiver and 5.1 with tower speakers on my computer. Mobile, I have the Bose QC-35. In my van, I have time aligned 3 way active front stage, subs, 3 amps, and maybe 80 diy hours in sound deadening.

GammaLoo yeah, I think that was the point. Riley and James audio stream had different audio quality.