Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Non-audiophile reactions to high-end headphones Part II
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Non-audiophile reactions to high-end headphones Part II - Page 295

post #4411 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

It came to me, too, and I rip to FLAC whenever possible, but to load FLAC or those stupidly large hi-res files onto a DAP for sound quality (*ahem*Pono*ahem*) is BS. 

Maybe BS for you, but there wouldn't be a pretty large niche of high end DAPs that play hi bitrate. Clearly not BS for other people. Preaching your own opinion as truth and declaring other people are full of **** is what bad people do. Very bad people. I know some people can hear the difference, even if placebo.
post #4412 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by imran27 View Post

The point here is, non-audiophiles mostly don't agree with us in spending money and space for FLAC files.
They are rather satisfied with 128k mp3's or 320k mp3 at best (although very very uncommon, even my best friend didn't know about quality vs bit-rate till I told him about it a couple of months back, and guess what... he's an engineer - EE)

I think that it's only the audiophile community that can afford a ton of storage budget only for a small quality enhancement, even a tiny bit. Non-audiophiles won't ever do that. They'd prefer having more good quality songs rather than less but best quality songs
I was just stating my point. My parents are always extremely attentive to my views and after listening to my reasonings, now allow me to frequent local audiophile shops selling gear and music whenever I have the time
post #4413 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by TripBitShooter View Post
 
I was just stating my point. My parents are always extremely attentive to my views and after listening to my reasonings, now allow me to frequent local audiophile shops selling gear and music whenever I have the time

This is probably the second time you've hinted about how awesome your life is as a teenage audiophile. Thanks a lot. :rolleyes:

post #4414 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post
 

This is probably the second time you've hinted about how awesome your life is as a teenage audiophile. Thanks a lot. :rolleyes:

 

You sound like you're not having a good time as a teenage audiophile..

post #4415 of 4422

LET US GET BACK ON TRACK!

Anyway, i let my grandmother try my DT990s.

"Ohh, these are nice, They really do sound good! Mind playing any smooth jazz?"

She, however does not like headphones as 'they'll ruin her hair'

I told her about IEMs... "If they're as good as those, then i might have to get into this audio stuff."

 

Hehehe... though she is a tad wealthy... i would not be surprised if she got some thousand dollar IEMs at the get go... (and that would make me jealous!)

post #4416 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by DieForSurviving View Post
 

LET US GET BACK ON TRACK!

Anyway, i let my grandmother try my DT990s.

"Ohh, these are nice, They really do sound good! Mind playing any smooth jazz?"

She, however does not like headphones as 'they'll ruin her hair'

I told her about IEMs... "If they're as good as those, then i might have to get into this audio stuff."

 

Hehehe... though she is a tad wealthy... i would not be surprised if she got some thousand dollar IEMs at the get go... (and that would make me jealous!)


Tell her about the CIEM Noble Kaiser 10, and tell her to get a couple pair with you :P

post #4417 of 4422

Forget that!

post #4418 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by 62ohm View Post

You sound like you're not having a good time as a teenage audiophile..
A lot of the time it's Try Not Buy... smily_headphones1.gif
post #4419 of 4422
Just throwing my 2¢ into the 320 vs Flac.

For reference, I use dbAudioconveter which is an $80 audio converter with the most up-to-date mp3 lame conversion.

Now the problem is, people have no idea what they're listening for on 320 vs flac. Listen to some 8kbps, 16, 32, and so on until you get to 320kbps then try flac, see if you hear the same difference.

Anyway, some of the problems with flac vs. 320 is that mediocre encoders and false 320kbps are everywhere. Meaning that. 256kbps can be converted to 320kbps without any improvement and be touted as a better version. The real way to do it is convert it yourself from Flac to 320kbps and see if you hear a difference.

Another reason some flac sound better is because of what I referenced earlier, 320 coming from a 256 rather than a flac file. Generally CDs are mastered better/differently than their 256kbps counterparts so with that in mind, I always buy the CD, convert it to ALAC for iTunes compatibility & 320kbps for mobile use. This is the best set up for me.
post #4420 of 4422

I think most of us who do blind a/b test use mp3 ripped from the same flac they want to compare.

 

And yes, the encoder quality might be a factor in deciding qualities of those mp3 rips. Comparing 128 kbps to 320 kbps and 320 kbps to flac there was definitely audible differences. I noticed that the differences were highly dependent on the music you're listening, some songs just don't have enough richness to produce a very audible impact when going down to 320 kbps. For some songs it was inaudible while for some it was very apparent even for non-audiophiles.

post #4421 of 4422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hapster View Post

Just throwing my 2¢ into the 320 vs Flac.

For reference, I use dbAudioconveter which is an $80 audio converter with the most up-to-date mp3 lame conversion.

Now the problem is, people have no idea what they're listening for on 320 vs flac. Listen to some 8kbps, 16, 32, and so on until you get to 320kbps then try flac, see if you hear the same difference.

Anyway, some of the problems with flac vs. 320 is that mediocre encoders and false 320kbps are everywhere. Meaning that. 256kbps can be converted to 320kbps without any improvement and be touted as a better version. The real way to do it is convert it yourself from Flac to 320kbps and see if you hear a difference.

Another reason some flac sound better is because of what I referenced earlier, 320 coming from a 256 rather than a flac file. Generally CDs are mastered better/differently than their 256kbps counterparts so with that in mind, I always buy the CD, convert it to ALAC for iTunes compatibility & 320kbps for mobile use. This is the best set up for me.

 

 

Agreed, I think the most important aspect in terms of music file quality is the encoding, then mastering, then the bitrate.

post #4422 of 4422

I have to start most headphone conversations with "I'm a bit of a nerd but..." Thankfully, most of my friends understand the purpose of looking for headphones  (in fact, i've already started bringing a friend into the game). I have learned never to say anything to beats owners because it's not worth it, although, my beats-toting roommate asked me the other day what I recommend as a replacement from his beats. Hopefully this beats trend is ending

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Non-audiophile reactions to high-end headphones Part II