As we often find with the continuing evolution of technology. Where something we thought was as good as it gets? But then something is created or a new way of doing an old thing, comes about.

How do we know the stuff that speakers are made of, are the best thing for producing sound?

I mean I know they have got the piece of glass that acts as a speaker. But how big of jump is glass, from speaker material?

What I'm saying is, has anyone tried testing the audio output capabilities of say, a barbecue chicken?

Or a, French alp?

Or a, corporeal spirit?

*Note: Yeah I've had a couple of bourbons! What of it?*

Now you're just teasing us..
 

Karyn
If you always (or mostly) pick the mp3 over the WAV when listening on your phone that's a +1 for mastering specifically for mp3...

I have noticed sometimes what's good for the monitors, isn't always good when mp3-ed. Often gigantic drums wind up sounding like plastic buckets...
 
I wonder is it possible to run a mathematical calculation on the probability of the parts that will be removed during the compression and not bother to have them there in the first place? Seems like a waste of sums, really... Who is building these plugs/synths/romplers that removes all the extraneous sampling, that the human mind cannot process, before it even hits the track? 
 
And as for all these unnecessary room sounds! Where are the companies making tin-can verbs? Nothing fills an ear-bud with the sense of depth, that the band was playing "live" right inside a can of Heinz!!!

Karyn
Now you're just teasing us..
 

Now that'd be great for the office!
 
        CO's assistant: "Morning tea anyone?...."
 
        Whole floor of workers: "F-YEAH!!!!"
 
Productivity on the other hand?...

When record players were in their infancy, companies used to do traveling demos that blew listeners' minds. They'd claim (and listeners generally agreed) that you couldn't tell the recording from the real thing, and then go on to prove it by having a violinist play behind a curtain so the audience could A/B the two. (I'm sure the comparison was aided by the fact that a curtain separated the violinist from the audience.)
 
But if we listen to records from the 1930's today, whether on vintage equipment or digital captures played on modern speakers, they sound obviously deficient. Even though our collective hearing is much worse today than typical 1930's ears were.
 

bitflipper
But if we listen to records from the 1930's today, whether on vintage equipment or digital captures played on modern speakers, they sound obviously deficient. Even though our collective hearing is much worse today than typical 1930's ears were.

 
I did wonder when they do lab versions of these types of tests, if they conduct a hearing test at the start, to take into account the individuals capacity for hearing in the first place?
 
I would hope they do and then filter the attendees down to those within normal range? But I've never seen these additive explanations of the test groups involved, just the overall published results.

In addition to what Dave said above, I would also imagine that the nature of human hearing comes into effect along with the Fletcher-Munson curve (which I just coincidentally happen to have a document about HERE ).
 
At lower volumes, the ears do not hear certain frequencies as well as they do at, say, 85 dB.  This is where the "Loudness" button on stereos used to come in and boost those frequencies for proper hearing at lower volumes (which has, needless to say, now been very abused).
 
Compression is what makes those damned commercials on TV sound louder than the program material when they are actually at about the same volume.  Therefore, unless you are doing this test at about 85 dB, the compressed mp3's are probably going to sound better.

bitflipper
When record players were in their infancy, companies used to do traveling demos that blew listeners' minds. They'd claim (and listeners generally agreed) that you couldn't tell the recording from the real thing...

On the topic of real feel. I have experienced while mixing a couple of tracks for a mate-of-a-mate's band, a preference by the artists (phwoar! I think I'm stretching that word?...) for the square wave form. Now, I don't mean "almost" square. I mean Spongebob Squarepants came out of my DAW and made me instantly hate him!
 
I also did dynamics preserving mixes for them. I normally do late 90's style of editing, so the songs didn't have great caverns of variance and (IIRC?) topped out a whole 1.2db below clip (after mastering, I think the mixes were in the -8db range?) Just small changes to give it power in the chorus, but they weren't having it! 
 
Still it makes the whole process quicker, I suppose? Just chuck a few ballpark eq's on each track, turn any reverb plugs down so they can barely be heard, gain match wave forms with sledge hammer technique and then limit/compress/maximise, until the creator of recorded music, rolls in his (her? they? it?) grave!
 
Then they have the nerve to question clarity? I query, "Do you want clarity or insane volume?"... Needless to say, Mr Spongebob walked away with the 'W' on that day... I suppose if there were moments of varying volume, they might feel something? But apparently that's not what music is for? It is just for blocking out everything else!
 
Perhaps, more power to them, if they enjoy it?... But then what would I have to whinge about?
 
*If I had a front lawn, despite it currently being 1:58am here in Australia, I would go outside and randomly scream, "What have I told you kids about playing on my lawn?!!" Then I'd sit in a chair on my non-existent porch and keep watch for slackers who just don't appreciate things "MY WAY?!!!"*
 

craigb
In addition to what Dave said above, I would also imagine that the nature of human hearing comes into effect along with the Fletcher-Munson curve (which I just coincidentally happen to have a document about HERE ).

 
Couple this Fletcher-Munson curve, with the ability to psychologically fool yourself into thinking that you are hearing something, that may in fact not even be there. And dear luuuurd, what is this wily mistress known as sound?
 

And if I’m riding in a car going 80 miles an hour will my MP3 sound better than pushing my lawn mower at 5 miles an hour where ear buds? I know that when someone is in the passenger seat of my car I can’t hear the right side speaker unless they have no legs. But maybe if they sing along it will balance out the sound unless I’m singing along as well. In any case I didn’t give much thought about compression, well until now and I’m lost on the whole subject…  so I guess if it sounds good to me, it will sound good to those who think it does. ;) other wise not. :)
 
Peace!