MP3 (320 kbps) VS flac/wav

[fr0g]

I think you misunderstood my rant. I was initially comparing 2 lossy codecs with each other Sony's atrac with MP3. In my opinion even at It's lowest bitrate atrac is better than MP3 at a higher bitrate. I don't think either of these formats compare to flac. Like I said I ripped my first few CD's into flac last night and listened to them through cheap JVC headphones and flac sounded miles better than both atrac and MP3.

Sorry 3 lossy codecs, atrac, MP3, and aac.

It isn't the codec.

I have yet to meet anyone who can tell 320 Kpbs MP3 from WAV and prove it. So if a 64K Atrac sounds "better", it possibly sounds "different", as 64K is very low quality, and your preference is a subjective thing. Or it could be a bad rip.

You have yet to meet anyone who can't tell? You need to get out more.

"can tell".

I'd be interested in your ABX results.

I'd be happy to bet you £100 that you can't do it personally. I'd do the rips. In fact I would do some 220 Kbps VBR rips to give you a better chance. Furthermore I'd have you another £100 double or quits at 190 VBR if you liked. You have pick the WAV 10 of 10. That's it. If it's so "Night and day" as many people insist then it should be a breeze??

By the way, from past experience, when someone says "You should get out more", it usually means they don't get out much. Just sayin'

 

[Anonymous]

220vbr it is then. I'll rip at flac with Media Go. Then its just a couple of mouse clicks to transfer to my Sony in MP3 or aac in whatever bit rate I want. I'm going to rip in flac because at some future date I want to get a Denon CEOL or Marantz MCR603 and stream to it. But that's a subject for another thread I suppose.(and there have been plenty of posts on that subject)

 

[manicm]

I think you misunderstood my rant. I was initially comparing 2 lossy codecs with each other Sony's atrac with MP3. In my opinion even at It's lowest bitrate atrac is better than MP3 at a higher bitrate. I don't think either of these formats compare to flac. Like I said I ripped my first few CD's into flac last night and listened to them through cheap JVC headphones and flac sounded miles better than both atrac and MP3.

Sorry 3 lossy codecs, atrac, MP3, and aac.

It isn't the codec.

I have yet to meet anyone who can tell 320 Kpbs MP3 from WAV and prove it. So if a 64K Atrac sounds "better", it possibly sounds "different", as 64K is very low quality, and your preference is a subjective thing. Or it could be a bad rip.

You have yet to meet anyone who can't tell? You need to get out more.

"can tell".

I'd be interested in your ABX results.

I'd be happy to bet you £100 that you can't do it personally. I'd do the rips. In fact I would do some 220 Kbps VBR rips to give you a better chance. Furthermore I'd have you another £100 double or quits at 190 VBR if you liked. You have pick the WAV 10 of 10. That's it. If it's so "Night and day" as many people insist then it should be a breeze??

By the way, from past experience, when someone says "You should get out more", it usually means they don't get out much. Just sayin'

Well what software would you use to rip WAVs? Cos I will tell you now both iTunes and WMP are categorically rubbish at ripping WAVs. I trust EAC, and perhaps the much lauded dbPowerAmp - which costs and being the tightwad that I am haven't used it yet.

 

[Alec]

How is iTunes OK for AIFF but not WAV?

 

[fr0g]

How is iTunes OK for AIFF but not WAV?

WAV is Microsoft/IBM standard way of storing PCM, AIFF is Apple standard way of storing PCM.

 

[Alec]

Yes, but manicm seems to me to be saying WAVs ripped in itunes will sound worse.

 

[fr0g]

Yes, but manicm seems to me to be saying WAVs ripped in itunes will sound worse.

They shouldn't, but then there is another thread around which casts doubts on the quality of iTunes for ripping...

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/computer-based-music/my-squeezebox-touch-sounds-distorted-through-coaxial

 

[HDNumpty]

[UNPUBLISHED DUPLICATE]

I'm not sure this proves that iTunes is poor for ripping, just that if you own all Apple kit, rip to ALAC for compatibility purposes, if you're using Sonos/Squeezebox/a hi-fi music streamer your best bet is probably FLAC

'in theory' ALAC files ripped using 'error correction' should be just as good as FLAC. I think transcoding on-the-fly from Apple to WAV or FLAC creates problems.

A friend of mine (who is not on this forum) tried a Squeezebox into his 3k Chord DAC. I think the files were ALAC converted on the fly - it sounded rubbish, totally contrary to what most SB users report.

 

[HDNumpty]

I'm not sure this proves that iTunes is poor for ripping, just that if you own all Apple kit, rip to ALAC for compatibility purposes, if you're using Sonos/Squeezebox/a hi-fi music streamer your best bet is probably FLAC

'in theory' ALAC files ripped using 'error correction' should be just as good as FLAC. I think transcoding on-the-fly from Apple to WAV or FLAC creates problems.

A friend of mine (who is not on this forum) tried a Squeezebox into his 3k Chord DAC. I think the files were ALAC converted on the fly - it sounded rubbish, totally contrary to what most SB users report.

 

[landzw]

Real audio is the sumation of multiple different frequency sine waves of varying amplitude.

No. Real audio is the hairs on the back of my neck standing up. Real audio is closing my eyes and being transported to another place or time. Real audio is an emotional response to the melody or words that the composer has arranged. A perceived meaning in the lyrics that relate to your current emotional state or memory.

If you'r hairs stand up on the back of you'r neck while listening to Slipnott then i think you need help

 

[SteveR750]

MP3 at 320 kbps sounds exactly like a WAV or Flac file in my opinion. I tried and tried but could not hear a difference.

Some people here have a different opinion on this ? I'd like to hear it

I agree.

Preaching to the choir here, my system adds up to almost 3000 pounds....I assume its decent right? Am using expensive interconnects, speaker cables, surge protector and a ups. Still, I can hear no difference whatsoever even with well-recorded stuff. Some might disagree and yes I still rip my cds to losless just incase I get a 20000 pound system that will tell the difference

I can, and not just me, so can my partner who has no idea when the PC is streaming spotify or MC17 is streaming any kind of audio file! I have not got golden ears by any way (I took the online hearing test, have above average pitch perception, below average rhythm, and average sensitivity in one ear for my age, a slight problem in the other).

 

[Beardedsurfer]

I know this is an old thread but have to comment.

Music is not just about what you can hear but also about what you can feel. Your body will pick up sounds which can not be heard both low and high. This is what is missing in all compressed music (and is why live music is so great). Lossless sound very good but is missing the data that you can't hear.

:rockout:

 

[Alec]

I know this is an old thread but have to comment.

Music is not just about what you can hear but also about what you can feel. Your body will pick up sounds which can not be heard both low and high. This is what is missing in all compressed music (and is why live music is so great). Lossless sound very good but is missing the data that you can't hear.

:rockout:

No, th eclue is in the "lossless". Or are you arguing that all formats are inferior because they are not a live concert?

 

[jimmy1]

vinyl is technically better than cd a good cartridge and needle combo will pick more information from the vinyl than the cd contains

 

[The_Lhc]

vinyl is technically better than cd a good cartridge and needle combo will pick more information from the vinyl than the cd contains

Absolute nonsense, vinyl has a lower dynamic range and a smaller frequency range than CD. Don't get me wrong, I love vinyl but that statement is wrong in just about every way possible.

 

[MajorFubar]

vinyl is technically better than cd a good cartridge and needle combo will pick more information from the vinyl than the cd contains

No. It won't. Not ever. Fact.

 

[jimmy1]

then why do 24/96 vinyl rips sound better than cd, extra sounds such as string noise and breathing picked up on the recording that wont be on the same cd

 

[The_Lhc]

then why do 24/96 vinyl rips sound better than cd, extra sounds such as string noise and breathing picked up on the recording that wont be on the same cd

I've never experienced that, care to give any examples?

 

[jimmy1]

one size fits all by frank zappa in 24/96 flac, if i burn it to cd its loses some detail and the difference between higher volume sections and lower volume sections become closer

 

[jimmy1]

to be fair it was about 10 grands worth of equipment to rip that vinyl

 

[SiUK]

You also hear through your bones. And as bone density differs from person to person ...

 

[jimmy1]

I tend to use my ears

 

[CnoEvil]

I tend to use my ears

.....or even the bones in your ears. 8)

 

[JoelSim]

I've witnessed very noticeable differences between 320 and CD, in the CD's favour.

 

[christian u]

Well I just recommended the Sound Liaison recordings on another thread.(soundliaison.com)

On their site you can listen to the recordings for free in a resonable high Mp3 conversion.(my guess is 256)

If you like what you hear, you can buy one track or a whole album as a Hi-Rez Studio Master Wav download.

My point is; they sure believe one can hear a difference or they would not offer their product for free in compressed form.

If you listen to the first track ''I'm on Fire''from the Carmen Gomes Album ''Thousand Shades of blue'',

you can listen to it here:http://www.soundliaison.com/products-from-our-studio-showcase-series/1-carmen-gomes-inc

there is this beutifull little intro where the drums are playing what I believe are called rimshots,If you listen to that in the Studio Master Wav Download version,to (do that you have to download it first ),the decay of the sound is so much more rich than in the mp3 version.

I must say that listening to high resolution is a bit of a learning experience,the more you do it,the better you hear the difference.

But beware,it's like with good wine,once you like it, there is no turning back.

And of course you need good equipment,a pair of Sennheiser HD 800 headphones is a relatively cheap way of enjoying high quality audio.