Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Difference between MP3 and FLAC?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Difference between MP3 and FLAC? - Page 4

post #46 of 93
6/23/09 at 6:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
This is all very nice, but I have the same card with the same opamps and more revealing headphones and I can't tell the difference between 320kbps MP3 and FLAC on my best recordings. Even if I feel there is a slight difference I couldn't identify which is better.
oh you also run 3x LME49720HA on an STX? that's cool!

and does it mean that your "best" recordings are better than mine? that your audition is better than mine(I pass audiograms easily)? what are your headphones then? HD800?

but truth is I don't do mp3, the SQ lacks

I show technical distortion measurements, it's hard to argue against figures I know...be strong
Reply
post #47 of 93
6/23/09 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
oh you also run LME49720HA? that's cool!
Yes I do. You can't beat the price from National (ie free).

Quote:
and does it means that your "best" recordings are better than mine?
Don't be defensive, it means exactly what I said. The best recordings I have, the most challenging recordings I have.

Quote:
what are your headphones then? HD800?
I said my most revealing headphones. I believe my most revealing are RE-0, DT250 and AD900.


Quote:
I show technical distortion measurements, it's hard to argue against figures I know...be strong
Throwing graphs around proves very little without correct interpretation. .0016% up to .003% doesn't sound bad at all. In fact without understanding the principles, I would hazard a guess that it is beyond what humans are capable of hearing. To be sure of this though, and all I ask of you, is to do an ABX test in foobar. If the sound quality of 320kbps MP3's is as horrible as you make it out to be, then you should have no problem discerning which is which to a level that would be considered statistically significant.

I don't even want you to post the results, just for your own good.
Reply
post #48 of 93
6/23/09 at 6:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
Throwing graphs around proves very little without correct interpretation. .0016% up to .003% doesn't sound bad at all. In fact without understanding the principles, I would hazard a guess that it is beyond what humans are capable of hearing. To be sure of this though, and all I ask of you, is to do an ABX test in foobar. If the sound quality of 320kbps MP3's is as horrible as you make it out to be, then you should have no problem discerning which is which to a level that would be considered statistically significant.
oh cool, we don't care about THD+N after all!! I'm glad you told me

you know, you can't really A/B DS+KMixer against KS or ASIO....use one for one week, then switch to the other and you WILL hear the difference.

mp3 sounds distorted and emotion-less, it's not transparent anymore....it's like listening to the radio basically, where lossless was being "in" the music.

but if 160JS mp3 sounds like lossless to your ears, more power to you

and before calling the DT250/AD900 more revealing than the DT770 Premium/600Ω, maybe you could try to learn more about it....it's not quite a DT770/Pro80

anyway, this thread is not going anywhere....I simply wanted to add distortion measurements instead of the usual "I can't hear no difference, so it's the shiznit" arguments
Reply
post #49 of 93
6/23/09 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
oh cool, we don't care about THD+N after all!! I'm glad you told me
Not if I can't hear them.

Quote:
you know, you can't really A/B DS+KMixer against KS or ASIO....use one for one week, then switch to the other and you WILL hear the difference.
We aren't talking about KS, ASIO or DS.

Quote:
mp3 sounds distorted and emotion-less, it's not transparent anymore....it's like listening to the radio basically, where lossless was being "in" the music.
Then do an ABX in foobar.

Quote:
but if 160JS mp3 sounds like lossless to your ears, more power to you
320kbps, though current generation encoding of 160kbps MP3 is very good indeed.

Quote:
and before calling the DT250/AD900 more revealing than the DT770 Premium/600Ω, maybe you could try to learn more about it....it's not quite a DT770/Pro80
I listed my three most revealing headphones. I believe the RE-0 is more revealing than them all.

Quote:
anyway, this thread is not going anywhere....I simply wanted to add distortion measurements instead of the usual "I can't hear no difference, so it's the shiznit" arguments
You added nothing of value. Only that there is a .0016% to .003% difference in a measurement you can't interpret.

And above all, stop committing straw man fallacies by purposely misrepresenting my arguments. I never talked of ASIO, KS or DS. I never said 160kbps. Go ABX for yourself between a FLAC and 360kbps, it is possible to tell the difference, but very few can do it, far fewer than the number of people who think they can, and even those that can tell the difference usually can't discern which is better or which is the FLAC and which is the MP3... and even then nobody who can claims that 320kbps MP3 is vastly or clearly inferior like you do.
Reply
post #50 of 93
6/23/09 at 7:01am
it's time for a sticky to end this discussion once and for all.
Reply
post #51 of 93
6/23/09 at 7:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
You added nothing of value. Only that there is a .0016% to .003% difference in a measurement you can't interpret.
right, maybe you should call National, and let them know that -after all- THD+N is meaningless!

Audio Specifications

Quote:
THD+N. Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise
What is tested? Similar to the THD test above, except instead of measuring individual harmonics this tests measures everything added to the input signal. This is a wonderful test since everything that comes out of the unit that isn't the pure test signal is measured and included -- harmonics, hum, noise, RFI, buzz ... everything.

How is it measured? THD+N is the rms summation of all signal components (excluding the fundamental) over some prescribed bandwidth. Distortion analyzers make this measurement by removing the fundamental (using a deep and narrow notch filter) and measuring what's left using a bandwidth filter (typically 22 kHz, 30 kHz or 80 kHz). The remainder contains harmonics as well as random noise and other artifacts.
Reply
post #52 of 93
6/23/09 at 7:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
right, maybe you should call National, and let them know that -after all- THD+N is meaningless!
Another straw man fallacy. I never said it is meaningless to the extent you are implying. You are twisting my point on purpose to suit your own argument. If you cannot differentiate the two then it is meaningless to us as audio enthusiasts. But all I ask of you is just to double blind test for your own sake to prove to yourself that what you believe you are hearing is indeed real, not merely a manifestation of your expectations of each format. Especially to the extent you claim that MP3 sucks, which means the double blind test should be straightforward and easy for you to pass.
Reply
post #53 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:01am
Please stop arguing with leeperry, it's completely useless.
He's just a troll (and a very big one indeed).
Reply
post #54 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:04am
well it all falls back to the fact that I don't distort my music on purpose. I enjoy the astonishing low distortion rates of the LME49720HA, and I don't plan on ruining the National/Asus engineers work w/ some lossy compression....otherwise I'd still be listening to vynil and tape them on audio cassette w/ Dolby B

the most distorted parts are the source and the headphones, headphones I can't do nothing about....but I want the source to be as clean and clear as possible. if you feel MP3 is "good enough", great!

I honestly thought that 24/96 sounded so much better than 16/44.1, but after discussing it w/ Gregorio I came to the conclusion that properly dithered 16/44.1 can sound "almost" as good....but mp3 I don't buy, I'm not in the market for distorted audio on purpose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little country rat View Post
Please stop arguing with leeperry, it's completely useless.
He's just a troll (and a very big one indeed).
Quote:
Little country rat
Junior Head-Fi'er Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1
and that's your first post! you're a very wise man...in a way
Reply
post #55 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
if you feel MP3 is "good enough", great!
It isn't about being good enough. It is about people claiming that MP3 is junk... and clearly audibly so. What I am saying is, you are spreading misinformation and slander. It is posts like yours that fill this hobby with so much self-affirming BS that people honestly believe the most ridiculous things without even for themselves testing it. As an example there are a whole bunch of people that honestly believe they can tell between WAV and FLAC, and they feed off each other for support and to propagate lies.

So, I already know the reality of the situation, I know you honestly believe you can tell the difference, I used to think the same thing. However, I doubt you can, and I think you are drastically exaggerating the difference. Now, if you take a ABX, the reality of the differences will be staring you directly in the eye, at that point it will be very hard for you to maintain your current attitude, even if you can tell the difference consistently, you will have to admit to yourself that the differences are negligible at best. So go do the test, realize it is not as you say, then don't be ashamed, alot of people think they can tell until they actually do an ABX... me included.
Reply
post #56 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:31am
well, as I already said, my aim is to get as little distortion as possible...it makes the trebles clearer and more transparent/true to life, hell the sound is so natural on my set up...feels like the band is playing in my room

ABX'ing is not the be-all/end all of audio enjoyment IMO, I want my music bit-perfect w/ what came off the mastering studio...and HDD's are so cheap these days that it's a no-brainer in my book.

you can't trust your ears, these are very poor measuring tools...for this I trust WaveSpectra, and it shows me that MP3 is up to no good -distortion wise-.

I understand kiddies w/ ipod's and ibuds couldn't care less about THD+N, if you look at the link I pasted on the previous page more ppl voted for 128kbit than for 320

is that because ppl dumb down music to 128kbit britney spears junk on ipod's that mp3 has become acceptable now? actually I have the same problem w/ movies, DTS sounds really bad...and it's not just all in my head this time, there's many threads about it...basically 448kb AC3 sounds/measures better than 1.5mbit DTS

lossless LPCM soundtracks are a god bless!
Reply
post #57 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:42am
"you can't trust your ears, these are very poor measuring tools...for this I trust WaveSpectra, and it shows me that MP3 is up to no good -distortion wise-."

So if I read you correctly, it's not your ears but wavespectra that enjoys the music ?

In order to help Pistachio in his crusade to make you think a little bit, he never said that mp3 was bitperfect distortion-free music, he was just stressing the fact that most usually yours ears can't tell the difference... And you seem to agree with that opinion, as you admit that your ears are very poor measuring tools.

And I don't even talk about the very poor quality of some recent CD's, that sound already like an mp3.
Reply
post #58 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:44am
It's the same principle as ISF calibration you don't use your eyes but a calibrated colour meter.
Reply
post #59 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:48am
exactly! w/ a stock projector, your eyes will quickly "calibrate themselves"(white balance, etc) to the shody colors....but calibrate it to D65/2.3/SMPTE-C gamut, and movies will simply look WAY better!

using your eyes or ears to make measurements is pointless....watching movies w/ lossless soundtracks(and a bitperfect audio renderer) in 24/48Hz on a perfectly calibrated projector, now we're talking
Reply
post #60 of 93
6/23/09 at 8:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
well, as I already said, my aim is to get as little distortion as possible...it makes the trebles clearer and more transparent/true to life, hell the sound is so natural on my set up...feels like the band is playing in my room
And I can assure you that you still wouldn't be able to ABX them and that a 320kbps MP3 would sound the same. If in the case that you can tell that they are different, you would probably be incapable of telling which is the FLAC and which the MP3 anyway.

Quote:
ABX'ing is not the be-all/end all of audio enjoyment IMO, I want my music bit-perfect w/ what came off the mastering studio...and HDD's are so cheap these days that it's a no-brainer in my book.

you can't trust your ears, these are very poor measuring tools...for this I trust WaveSpectra, and it shows me that MP3 is up to no good -distortion wise-.
That is all well and good, but then you really shouldn't be stating you can clearly hear the difference, and that 320kbps MP3s sound rubbish, you can say they look rubbish in WaveSpectra if you want, but don't pretend they sound rubbish, the differences are minuscule and I really doubt you can tell the difference. Using lossless for archival purposes is all well and reasonable.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Difference between MP3 and FLAC?