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

FLAC vs. 320 Mp3 - Page 3  

post #31 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImperialX View Post

 

 

Can't be truer. I can't tell the difference between 320kps MP3 and FLAC with my HD800, but I can hear the noises and imperfections of cheap tracks recorded in a lackluster studio! I've heard many pieces of music that are 192kps on my HD800 that sound better than FLACs recorded in a bad studio!

This is so true to me, too.  I actually, downgraded my DAC because too much detail got me more noise and imperfection from recordings.  If I have to choose between "true to original intention" and "something sounds awesome", I'll choose the later any day of the week because I listen to music to enjoy not to analyze.

post #32 of 504

A lot of it also comes down to mastering. The recent album by RHCP was really badly mastered, everything is loud, everything is flat. Totally annoying to listen more than a couple of songs.

post #33 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by codeninja View Post

This is so true to me, too.  I actually, downgraded my DAC because too much detail got me more noise and imperfection from recordings.  If I have to choose between "true to original intention" and "something sounds awesome", I'll choose the later any day of the week because I listen to music to enjoy not to analyze.

Good luck trying to turn a crappy recording into an awesome one... Garbage in, garbage out.
post #34 of 504

not quite:  garbage in, garbage * gain out  :D

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post


Good luck trying to turn a crappy recording into an awesome one... Garbage in, garbage out.
post #35 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post


Good luck trying to turn a crappy recording into an awesome one... Garbage in, garbage out.


I agree. "Downgrading" a DAC is silly, especially considering most DACs are absolutely transparent. Nothing makes a bad recording sound awesome.

post #36 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by OJNeg View Post

Nothing makes a bad recording sound awesome.

 

A great headphone, does.

post #37 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadlylover View Post

 

A great headphone, does.

 

I strongly disagree. It's all about the source material. Most important part of the chain, even over loudspeakers/headphones.

post #38 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by OJNeg View Post

I strongly disagree. It's all about the source material. Most important part of the chain, even over loudspeakers/headphones.

 

I meant, it makes bad recordings bearable, the flaws disappear, and you get engulfed in the music.

 

I think that sounds awesome.

post #39 of 504
Bad recordings generally sound worse to me in headphones, however, sometimes with speakers, a bad recording can become listenable because the noise isn't shooting directly into your ears.
post #40 of 504

What I meant by downgrading my DAC was that with less precise DAC, I don't get to here as much detail, which often comes in the form of imperfection.  Yeah, it's still there, but it's masked, and it won't be as obvious.  Sort of like when I watch some bluray movies, I see skins of actors, not the actor or the movie itself.  Sometimes, the less is more. :)

post #41 of 504
I doubt your DAC made any difference at all.
post #42 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I doubt your DAC made any difference at all.


Way too truthful and BS free for Head-Fi. Look up internet audio forums in an encyclopedia, and it will say, "But I KNOW what I heard!" o2smile.gif

 

Actual thread title on High-end Audio Forum, "If you had $5000 to spend on a DAC what would you buy?" 121 replies. Wonder no more why audiophiles have a reputation of cluelessness with the general public.


Edited by Clarkmc2 - 6/28/12 at 1:12am
post #43 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by codeninja View Post

What I meant by downgrading my DAC was that with less precise DAC, I don't get to here as much detail, which often comes in the form of imperfection.  Yeah, it's still there, but it's masked, and it won't be as obvious.  Sort of like when I watch some bluray movies, I see skins of actors, not the actor or the movie itself.  Sometimes, the less is more. :)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I doubt your DAC made any difference at all.

 

Read up a bit on DACs and you'll find that just about every well-designed DAC is completely transparent. In short, you can't really have a "less precise" DAC that gives you "less detail". That's not how it works.

post #44 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by flight567 View Post

the way it was explained to me, is that a lossy file will open the file, when it opens it decompresses, and in that decompress, there is a "loss" then it saves the file again after the loss.so each time you open thefile, you lose some of the quality, they may be the same "out the box" but overtime the lossy will degrade. from what i understand atleast.

Maybe he's right.  There could be some virus that unleashed a fidelity troll that resides on the sandy bridge chip in his pc.  It eats a little bit of the mp3 every time he plays the file.

post #45 of 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by OJNeg View Post

 

 

Read up a bit on DACs and you'll find that just about every well-designed DAC is completely transparent. In short, you can't really have a "less precise" DAC that gives you "less detail". That's not how it works.

Sure. Every DAC that I've listened to sounded all the same. L3000.gif

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