Originally Posted by Freebase Dali

Hmmm...

Ok.

First off, no matter the bitrate of their MP3s or otherwise, if they're listening on laptop speakers, they'll still be highly limited by the range of frequencies those speakers can produce. If listening solely via that method, bitrate is not really going to matter much... so I guess the rest of this will be assuming that the listener has listening equipment that can accurately translate what's going on in their audio.

1. You're assuming that everyone buying MP3s are buying 128 kbps versions. This would be a colossal mistake. 320 kbps is generally the bitrate any digital download is now offering for sale. While there is a measure of compression involved in any MP3 compression, I challenge you to offer up a 320 kbps vs. WAV format of the same material in a blind test and see if anyone can tell the difference. If you can, I challenge you to be challenged to the same test where you don't know the outcome.
I also challenge you to coming up with a self-test that compares a flac version of an original WAV file compared to a 320 kbps MP3 file and tell the difference over multiple iterations. Please let us know how that works out for you.

2. While you may be correct in some cases, you are not correct in all. And until you can provide evidence that you've heard every remastered album ever existing, I will assume your statement is based on the bad experience you've perceived yourself to have, while completely disregarding any positive experiences you've chosen to forget. Not to mention all the experiences you've never had.

3. While I agree that consumer-level listening equipment tends to be over-hyped, sonically inflated garbage, I think it's more than fallacious to assume that because your listening goals are your own, that everyone else's should be the same. Some folks just like to hear their music extra bassy and extra screechy. If that wasn't the case, every listening solution out there would present a dead flat response. The job as audio engineers is not to put them down for their preferences. The job is to make the audio they listen to translate well no matter what their preferences.

Part 2:

I don't know why you're recommending flash memory cards. There is a such thing as hard drives. This is completely capable of storing audio files no matter what format or bitrate, and probably has more capacity than a flash card. The memory card recommendation you made is completely asinine.

Secondly, you mention a certain pair of headphones as situationally optimum. If you knew anything about stereo field and true reproduction of such, you wouldn't be recommending headphones at all. But since you're obviously talking about a portable solution, I will let this slide, even though your solution is largely dictated by your own preference, since if you were the authoritative individual on the subject, I'd probably have read your publication, or you would have posted it.

Finally, you mention a specific player to obtain optimal results for this portable solution, but I've yet to see any evidence provided by you that one player can translate a standard audio file better than the next. When you're ready with that dissertation, let me know.

Part 3:

You basically provided an arbitrary, expensive solution to listening to music on laptop speakers. If anyone follows your advice, they will notice an increase in sound quality via the mere fact that they are no longer listening to the music on laptop speakers. I could probably achieve the same effect, unnoticable by them to any degree, simply offering a headphone solution plugged straight into their laptop.
What you THINK you're doing, is incorrect.
And I THINK that if you're unwilling to acknowledge that fact, then you should keep your absurd and unnecessary directives to yourself, so you don't have people making unnecessary purchases just to adhere to your perspective of how audio should be enjoyed.

Thanks, and have a nice day.