Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FLAC vs. 320 Mp3 - Page 12  

post #166 of 504
It's not that we don't trust you, it's just that you do.
post #167 of 504

Expectation bias is by far the most likely case, unless you are purposely randomly choosing to play from two identical playlists, one lossless one lossy, and only check which playlist you are listening to once you begin to feel fatigue or not. 

 

So many people take offense at the very idea that their perceptions are not reflective of 100% truth, despite the fact that EVERYONE is susceptible to these psychological phenomenon.  It is not a deficiency in the person, it is a result of millions of years of primate brain evolution. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wberghofer View Post

 

Classic expectation bias cannot be the case when people are not aware about the audio source or the file type. Please stop telling me and others what we feel, I’ve been listening long enough to both lossy and lossless music, and I do know how I feel after a while.

 

You also can’t compare the attention level paid to music playback or the soundtrack of TV and movies. When watching movies or TV, the moving image is the dominating part of the experience, but not the sound track.

 

When reading your posts, I often get the impression that your main goal was that your audio library fits into 2 TB of storage. If you’re happy with your incredibly extensive audio library ripped to AAC 256 VBR, then so be it. I’m happy when listening to my selected library in ALAC format, and fitting its size to a given storage size was not my primary goal; it was quality instead.

 

 

That’s wonderful self-explanatory, isn’t it?

 

Werner.


Edited by El_Doug - 7/17/12 at 12:55am
post #168 of 504

my friend with a srh940 claims he can differenciate FLAC and 320mp3, but when he passed his headphones to me i couldnt differenciate.
when i went home i tried it with my hd558 and i found out that i only could differenciate it about 30% of the time, 70% i was uncertain, even then i couldnt pin point out a single part of the music that was different, i could only feel the slight extra subtleness, but then again i might be wrong...

post #169 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

 

 

Regarding CBR vs. VBR: I cannot speak for AAC, but LAME's -V 0 switch limits the bitrate to the range 220 to 260 kbit/s.

 

This is incorrect. If the music is sufficiently complex, the bitrate can go right up to 320kbps.....it just won't stay up that high unless needed.

post #170 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

If you have speakers and want to get the most out of them, you might want to hire someone to calibrate your response then. Because equalizing requires a LOT of very precise listening and analysis. Unfortunately, it isn't something that you can just let slide. It's the single most important thing you can do to achieve good sound.
But if average sound is fine, just buying a couple of inexpensive bookshelf speakers and using the bass and treble is fine. I wouldn't spend more than $700 on a stereo without equalizing though. It's a waste of money to buy good speakers and play them out of calibration.

I've done it, but I would not look forward to doing it the next time I have to. It was a neccesity twice with the JBL 4345 four ways. Before and after modifications (biamping and rebuilding the crossover). One does not simply drop JBL studio monitors into a home and wing it. I had to draw the line at sofit mounting. They were designed to sound best that way, but they are the size and weight of refrigerators.

My full range augmented speakers needed nothing, thank goodness. In both cases, I do not have to move them around and the room changes very little. So when dialed in they tend to stay that way.
Edited by Clarkmc2 - 7/17/12 at 2:09am
post #171 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by wberghofer View Post

When reading your posts, I often get the impression that your main goal was that your audio library fits into 2 TB of storage.

It's much more convenient to have all of one's music on one drive. Easier to back up, easier to shuffle, easier to keep organized, easier to switch between libraries.

Wheni it comes to expectation bias, if you knew it was expectation bias, it wouldn't be expectation bias, would it? Based on your comments, it's pretty clear you're knee deep in it. Nothing wrong with that. We're only human. We don't think ill of you because of it. Don't worry.
Edited by bigshot - 7/17/12 at 11:27am
post #172 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarkmc2 View Post

I've done it, but I would not look forward to doing it the next time I have to.

I just finised the process (I think), and it was some of the most complex and precise listening I've ever had to do. I bought my new amp months ago and I've been working on it ever since. I screened a movie for some friends this weekend and played some music and they all commented on it. It's pretty good when you're showing a hidef film projected on a ten foot screen and they comment on the sound and not the picture!
post #173 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achmedisdead View Post

This is incorrect. If the music is sufficiently complex, the bitrate can go right up to 320kbps.....it just won't stay up that high unless needed.

That was my impression, but I wasn't sure of it. With my AAC 256 files, it allows the rate to drop to whatever is necessary and uses the bandwidth it saves to boost it up to 320 if it's needed. With 320 files, VBR is still a good idea because it optimizes the bitrate to avoid filling the file with needless bits. There really is no reason to use CBR at all.
post #174 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
[…] expectation bias […] it's pretty clear you're knee deep in it.

 

Do you ever actually read what the other person wrote before you click the “Quote” button?

 

Friends and relatives who are not interested at all in “analytical listening” but prefer to simply enjoy the music instead, made statements like “This just doesn’t feel right” or “Something’s missing” when they heard AAC 256 files in my home. The point is that these people were not aware of the music source or the file format they were listening to. Never heard such a statement the moment lossless music was being played to them.

 

Werner.


Edited by wberghofer - 7/17/12 at 12:08pm
post #175 of 504
I'm sorry, but when you say something that's clearly made up, I ignore it out of politeness. I've heard the "even my wife can tell on our car radio" stories before. They're obviously either totally made up or there is something terribly wrong with the car stereo. The reply i'm expecting next is "It's true! My wife did say that! And my car stereo sounds perfect!" which I'll probably let go by too. It's an entertaining anecdote, even if it isn't credible.

The difference between lossy and lossless isn't anywere close to being that great. When someone brings something like that up, their credibility with me plummets. People who can't even come within a country mile of accurately relating the relative differences and similarties between two things aren't the best judges of a difference that is difficult to discern at all under the best circumstances.

Like I said, normally I would just let it go, but you asked. Sorry.
post #176 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I just finised the process (I think), and it was some of the most complex and precise listening I've ever had to do. I bought my new amp months ago and I've been working on it ever since. I screened a movie for some friends this weekend and played some music and they all commented on it. It's pretty good when you're showing a hidef film projected on a ten foot screen and they comment on the sound and not the picture!
There is no way to balance the output of four drivers in one speaker without measurement. Fortunately a friend in Australia, the one who rebuilt the crossovers for me, worked out a method using a Radio Shack meter that is much more accurate than professional room measurement for the purpose. Only relative measurements are needed, so equipment calibration is not necessary. There are published corrections for the frequency response of the meter.
post #177 of 504
Double post
Edited by Clarkmc2 - 7/17/12 at 7:22pm
post #178 of 504
Yeah, I know. I've been rough tuning the response curve by ear. An engineer friend is going to come and work out the bumps using sine wave sweeps when he gets time. I'm interested to see how close I get.
Edited by bigshot - 7/17/12 at 1:34pm
post #179 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by immtbiker View Post

Here's an analogy that I came up with while reading this thread:

 

When my wife is agitating me, or a person who feels a need to tell me how I can be a better driver like him, I'd rather hear it in 128kbps instead of FLAC. I still hear them,

but there's no reason to hear them in hi-def audio.

 

If I am listening to music that I love and that gives me gobs of insatiable joy, I'd rather hear it in Lossless FLAC or ALAC instead of 256 or 320kbps. When my

wife is telling me why she loves me and how great a lover I am, I don't want to miss one consonant, or any tonal imbalance that might stop me from getting

110% of what is being broadcast.

 

I might not be able to hear all of the benefits of the higher bit-rate, but if there's a chance I might miss one, that's one too many.

 

Yes, the difference between 320 and flac might be almost negligible to most of our ears, but when comparing a 8MB 320 kpbs file to a 80MB 1100 kbps file, there is ~ 10% more information available to our ears, which equates to a deeper fuller soundstage with more air between all of the instruments and vocals, and a larger dynamic range, with

more sustained cymbal hits and a bass curve that doesn't die out as quickly.

 

Do I need a Bugatti Veyron that does 0-60 in less than 3 seconds? No, but it's nice to know that you have car that can get on the highway from a stop in less than 6 seconds.

You might not need it when transporting a crystal ice sculpture, but you do need it when getting on the Long Island Expressway during rush hour, when people are being mean

and closing you out just because they get joy out of other's misery. Do I need 520 hp? No, but I do need unending power when passing a semi who, if I don't pass, means that

I will be stck behind him doing 35 the next 7 minutes pulling out the the rest area onto a highway of rush hour mean people who would swallow you up alive, if given the chance.

 

To sum it up, the difference between 320 and lossless is very small when using anything other than really hi-quality home or portable equipment. But, it is there. If you have the space and you have a player that handles lossless, why not have the best files that you can, for those times that it makes a difference.

On my iPhone, I have everything at 320, rather than ALAC because, the iPhone will never give me quality that I crave, on the go. But, on my iMod with a high end DAC/Amp add-on, hi-quality output wiring, and my UE-10's or JH-13's, then you can bet that I am only going to contain a lossless library.

 

YMMV!

Well said 

post #180 of 504

What i like with flac is you can convert it from flac to flac and make it louder if you wish (via foobar) (replay gain), but for mp3 you cant (so very low  volume lossy files stay low) 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › FLAC vs. 320 Mp3