No difference between 128 and 320. - Page 4

 

 

thanks

^ Incidentally, here's a CSD plot of MP3. An MLS wave compressed with LAME -V5. The original wave produces a flat graph.

 

Unfortunately, MLS waves are about as far from natural-sounding as you can get, so that's not much more than a curiosity.

Necro'ing this thread :)

 

Ive done some 128 vs. 320 kbps - and other combos - testing today, and telling the difference was rarely too difficult with 128/320. Since mp3ornot apparently has a "badge" showing ones success rate Im gonna up the ante and proclaim now that I can beat 90%. I'll post some results tomorrow. However I will admit that the quality of some 128 files surpised me in a good way. I hope it isn't a trolling site with 320/320 files...

 

There is a lot of snake oil in the realm of hifi (everytime I see a $1000 cable I laugh and cry a little), but let's not make the same mistakes in the other direction. 128 can be decent, and Ive heard poor 24/96 rips due to the equipment/method used, but if the same person rips the same piece of music in 128 and in 320 there is a difference.

 

EDIT: I don't listen for artifacts btw. I mainly focus on the separation of notes (especially quick bass notes around the same frequency), the low end of medium/big tom drums and how the highs start/end. Can I appreciate music with a lower bitrate? Sure, but the elements I just listed are still things that can improve my listening experience.

 

EDIT2: OK, I should have read the entire thread before responding, seems El_Doug already made my point, thumbs up for that. 20/20 really put this threads headline to shame. With this in mind Im not sure Im gonna bother going back here to post results, but I will still check out the site for my own sake. 

 

 

 

 

... And how stupid is it to name a mp3 bitrate comparison site "mp3ornot"? Taste this, is it a banana or an orange? FRUIT OR NOT?!?! :D

Edited by TheGreatGazoo - 2/25/13 at 7:33pm

i am finally able to differenciate FLAC and MP3 320. (only for certain tracks)
the FLAC bass seems deeper, more solid and fuller while the MP3 lacks the solidness and depth. almost seems porous in comparison. the rest of the spectrum seems pretty much the same to me

Porous. Yeah. I see...

don't believe unless i do a full foobar double blind test?

Everyone here does a fair test. (If they don't they say they did anyway.)

This IMO totally comes down to the music that's being played. For example i got 70% on that mp3ornot test 

 

Actually i got all of them right believe it or not but it was just that one song where it starts off at "beautiful love" i could not tell a difference for the life of me and i wouldn't be surprised if both files are 320kbps :P Also, i got that song 3 times and all 3 i got wrong.... what are the chances eh?

 

My setup is laptop>FiiO E10>Sennheiser HD 558.. Yeah... not that impressive. I could always tell the differences between 320 and 128 with cheap ear buds.. it's probably because i like to listen to a lot of electronic/synthpop kinda music. Rock is probably the hardest to decipher from IMO. Also what everyone else is saying, depends on how it's ripped/encoded and so on. 

Edited by joshwalnut - 2/26/13 at 1:19am

I'm not so sure how well good equipment helps differentiate between lossy and lossless, but it certainly points out poorly recorded, produced, and mastered music. Bad transducers drag it all into the mud and make numb phantoms of passionate and clever music.

I did a blind test by shuffling the playlist and listening to both the files. After i made my guesses i look into the file and check the files. And i had actually gussed it correctly. However i only did this with a few songs which had clear low subbass. can't differentiate with other songs yet
Edited by streetdragon - 2/26/13 at 2:45am