Do 320kbps mp3 files really sound better? Take the test! - Page 3

Picked correctly; but as others have suggested a different clip would make the differences more obvious.  I would love to see a Clip 3 in FLAC for comparison sake.

ahahah.

man it was tough.  but the snare/high hat gave me an indication.

lol i was sweating it.  thinking i gotta get this right or im wasting all this money on headphones and dacs and... PRESSURE.

somehow i got it right.  i dunno if it was a lucky guess or not.

For everyone trying to understand how their gear wasn't enough to understand the differences: the difference between MP3 bitrate is mostly in the detail. There are differences in bass extention and such, but they are nowhere as striking as the differences in detail and speed. So if you have a pair of K701 RE-0 it would be much easier to understand the differences than if you had some other more bass-focused can, since the first 2 are headphones known for their detail. So it doesn't mean you don't have good gear, it just means your gear isn't oriented to the qualities different bitrates MP3 sacrifice.

It helps if when you listen to it you relax, and focus on the details, and then it just hits you:  You can tell the difference instantly as long as your head phones are accurate and you have a good setup.
 

 

 

I got it right, through the drums mostly. That's where the details stood out.

I took the test with my M50s (which were already on my head) and I was right. The clip I chose sounded slightly more "atmospheric" or whatever you want to call it to my ears but the differences were almost imperceptible.

 

This test won't change my mind on which quality I encode my music in but it certainly does put things into perspective.

i got the answer correct and heard it right away. not such a great recording in the first place to hear a drastic difference but you can tell at least one is bit cleaner than another.

More power to you guys to hear the miniscule difference I couldn't. There was practically no difference to me at all. I could just have easily picked #1 and been with the majority saying "aha, there's the difference" when in fact, there wasn't much of one to speak of that makes the track unbearable to listen to.

I got it pretty quickly with my LCD-2/Lyr/XCiter DAC setup.

I got it correct using the Cary DAC > beta22 amp > HD800

Yeah it took 2 listens but I got it right, equipment is a POS USB laptop speaker and onboard soundcard.

 

The trick for me was in the cymbals, they are far sharper in the 320, a more crisp sound, while the cymbals in the 128 are less distinct and "fuzzy" sounding.

I got it wrong, but then again, I have trouble critically listening to songs I'm not absolutely familiar with - I can generally tell the difference between flac vs 320 using the ABX on foobar.

Got it right with my srh 840z plugged directly into my phone. The drums at the end of the clip did it for me.

this test further enforces my belief that mp3 is fine and i don't need any of this flac nonsense. i heard very little differences between the 128kbps and the 320kbps mp3s. in fact i voted the wrong one but wasn't satisfied so i went back to re listen. i head slight differences for the better in the 320kbps track in the drums area. but the difference i noticed was not enough to convince me that it should take up 2x the space. but i digress, i will continue to use 320kbps because i know they are better. maybe not by much but most downloads i find are in 320kbps nowadays anyways. but i am perfectly satisfied with 128kbps if need be. you guys are way way way to picky.

Edited by bcasey25raptor - 6/5/11 at 11:10pm