If you had to choose between these 2 files, which would you choose?

If you had to choose between these 2 files, which would you choose?
They are the same track, just from a different source.

Attached: choose.png (1918x1896, 2.65M)

nigga u aint gettin no answers for your red interview from us

also gtfo to /ptg/

>red
>private trackers

both are shit

bottom. top had a shaped dither applied to it

the mp3 ripped from youtube

Attached: c6b.png (680x680, 182K)

and what exactly is wrong with that?

protip: it's actually the better way

>youtube
>mp3

nvm figured it out

What?

It doesn't look like a dither to me. You can see the same noise on the bottom, just not after 20khz. So it's cut off in the bottom one.
Top is best. If you're looking at the spectrograms alone.

pm me the fix

I am assuming that the bottom is the source file, and the top had extra dither added for no real reason because there is not any extra noise in the bottom that would indicate a different type of dither.

Sent good luck

Marked as solved.

OP here

A guy (who the bottom file belongs to) is claiming the bottom one is better because the top one has more white noise, according to the spec.

Could be. Could also be wrong. The fact is: these spectrographs mean nothing if you don't know what the source is.

For the bottom one it could be a CD (so high quality) or a lossy source like mp3. But that does not mean that the top one is bad. It could be from a CD (if the recording simply has the noise), but it could also be from an LP (in that case it would be bad and not good as vinyl is a bad source for anyone who does not have his arse behind his ray ban or beats)

tl;dr
>spectographs mean nothing if you do not have the sources to make conclusions.

The patrician choice.

It is the exact same picture

Top is ripped from Tidal (24bit)
Bottom is ripped from qobuz (24bit)

Please note that the guy (bottom) is notorious for editing perfectly good 320kbps mp3's. He changes them to 48k just to give them 'headroom' and applies other pointless shit. I don't know if he's up to his usual shenanigans here though.

>applies other pointless shit
exactly what these people do.

look, I just told you that both files could have a lossless source. and indeed both sources claim to offer high fidelity music. now aks yourself: do you hear a difference?

or make the test and put both in audacity in flip the phase on one file and play both at the same time. what you hear is the difference between the files. (adjust volume on one file until you hear the least difference)

>48k just to give them 'headroom'
does not work that way. ever.

Yup, the bottom one.
You can see the white noise in the form of dark blue in the background at 20k and above.
Looks like the top was captured with an inferior pre-amp or DAC.

second one for playing out on large system, first one for whatever.

why are 128kbps mp3's so comfy, bros?

Second one, less noise.

a fellow nerd as well lol

>he has to do interview to download pirate stuff
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Literally can't make this shit up

It's inaudible. The top is better because it has more data (whether you see it as good as or bad data doesn't make a difference) and the bottom has had data removed, thus less true to the source.

this

>he doesn't give OP the wring answers to cuck him

I'm not taking any interview. Private trackers are shit for audio.

It's not necessarily true that data was removed from the bottom one. There are at least 2 scenarios:
1. The original file was of a higher bitrate (maybe 32-bit) and was encoded into what you see now, at 24-bit. If that is the case, than I would take the file on the top, because it is clear that dither has been added to reduce the quantization distortion that will have resulted from the bit reduction. The file on the bottom would in this case not have had that distortion removed, and thus would sound distorted. There is some personal preference in dither vs no dither, but most people prefer to use dither because hiss is typically preferable to distortion.
2. The original file is the one on the bottom and noise was added to the file on top for no reason. In that case obviously take the file on the bottom.

Here's another

Attached: choose_2.png (1918x1896, 2.72M)

Here's another

Attached: choose2.png (1918x1896, 2.76M)

depends on the speakers/genre of music

bottom looks better in general though

top looks like this awful grindhouse video filter.

Top ones are pure bullshit. All that grain has no reason to exist.
Even analog masters from the fucking 60's are cleaner than that.

I capture vinyl through my tube pre-amp. It looks like the top. The tubes add a small amount of distortion. Not saying that's how this was captured, just saying it looks like inaudible distortion caused by something in the sound chain.
>Doesn't matter, both probably sound identical.

see
That noise is at -100 dB, and what you cant see in that is the distortion that that noise smooths over