Posted 09/07/2008 at 05:45:58am

Greg Calbi and you can believe whatever you want.  I am not asking you to believe me.  I am asking disinterested readers to go to those three links, read, use their brains, and decide for themselves.  The quality of the wire does matter.  That is not to say that expensive wire will always sound better.  That is to say that expensive wire will never sound better.  It is to say that many audiophiles are suffering from confirmation bias and post-purchase rationalization.

Posted 05/28/2008 at 08:44:38am

Another myth is that records sound better than CDs: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf http://www.soundstageav.com/mastersonaudio/20050415.htm http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20030101.htm

Posted 05/28/2008 at 08:22:31am

Two myths are that expensive amplifiers and wires sound better than inexpensive amplifiers and wires: http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Greenhill.pdf http://www.theaudiocritic.com/

Posted 05/28/2008 at 08:04:02am

Perhaps about 175 kbps: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lame_Compiles#Recommended_encoder_compiles_and_source_code.

Posted 05/28/2008 at 07:53:11am

There is a lot of nonsense regarding what can and what cannot be heard; the only proper way to do this is with double-blind listening tests. First, use what may be the best MP3 encoder—LAME 3.97. Second, use a program to perform double-blind listening tests--http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABX.