Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Is it worth getting really high-end headphones if your source is 320kbps audio files?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is it worth getting really high-end headphones if your source is 320kbps audio files? - Page 8

post #106 of 257

i have an audeze LCD 2 latest.

what sounds best on it? every darn single thing you throw at it, flac or youtube or 320k. why? my laptop's DSP. why not high end dac/amp? very boring!

will i be crucified? well does it matter ;p ?

post #107 of 257
Ok before I get crucified let me clarify. I have tried the LCD 2 on my cell phone I nearly threw up.

There is something about the dell xps 9530 ...
post #108 of 257
LCD2 is a nice pair, but I never liked it after my 2nd HD800, I prefer D7000 than LCD2.2/2.3 (whatever it is now).
post #109 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by joker97 View Post

Ok before I get crucified let me clarify. I have tried the LCD 2 on my cell phone I nearly threw up.



There is something about the dell xps 9530 ...

 



Haha, funny. I didn't with my HD800, I still enjoy HD800 connected to my Samsung S3 cell phone, S3 has the worst DAC IMO, but still I prefer HD800 over mid/low end headphones.
post #110 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian411 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieE View Post

I have double blind tested my self with 320 mp3 and FLAC (both ripped myself using EAC which corrects errors) and I know I can't tell the difference.



Funny thing is, before I did the DB test - I really thought I did hear a difference. That's the human mind for you.



That said, my collection is still 99% FLAC because, why not? Storage is cheap and I like it being conceptually perfect even if I know I can't tell.

 



This is little Off the Topic but, with respect to your comment it really depends on the headphone.
You have to use high end gears to tell the differences. smily_headphones1.gif

Now, try DSD64/128. smily_headphones1.gif

 

I did this test when I had Stax SR303 with the 507 leather pads on. Those are lower distortion headphones than the majority on the market. 

 

I have never actually encountered anyone who could prove that they could pass a double blind test between a proper error-correcting rip to 320CBR and FLAC.

 

Most assume they could because they really do perceive a difference when they "know" one is better (I used to myself) but that difference disappears when the knowledge of which is supposed to be better disappears. 

post #111 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieE View Post

 

I did this test when I had Stax SR303 with the 507 leather pads on. Those are lower distortion headphones than the majority on the market. 

 

I have never actually encountered anyone who could prove that they could pass a double blind test between a proper error-correcting rip to 320CBR and FLAC.

 

Most assume they could because they really do perceive a difference when they "know" one is better (I used to myself) but that difference disappears when the knowledge of which is supposed to be better disappears. 

 



I will add the cable, 4N, 5N, 7N, or silver/copper, I can't tell the difference.
But at least with my CLAS DAC I was able to tell the difference between 320 vs FLAC, or maybe this whole thing was just a brain-wash that make my ears think it sounds better.

Let me test my golden ear again,

https://www.goldenears.philips.com/en/introduction.html
post #112 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian411 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieE View Post
 

 

I did this test when I had Stax SR303 with the 507 leather pads on. Those are lower distortion headphones than the majority on the market. 

 

I have never actually encountered anyone who could prove that they could pass a double blind test between a proper error-correcting rip to 320CBR and FLAC.

 

Most assume they could because they really do perceive a difference when they "know" one is better (I used to myself) but that difference disappears when the knowledge of which is supposed to be better disappears. 

 



I will add the cable, 4N, 5N, 7N, or silver/copper, I can't tell the difference.
But at least with my CLAS DAC I was able to tell the difference between 320 vs FLAC, or maybe this whole thing was just a brain-wash that make my ears think it sounds better.

Let me test my golden ear again,

https://www.goldenears.philips.com/en/introduction.html

 

I passed the Goldenear, but that doesn't go up to 320. I'd also add it took me several times of intense careful listening to pass the highest bitrate one.

 

Re. the mental brainwash - this is very, very real.

 

Like I said, I used to genuinely believe I could tell 320 from FLAC, because when I listened to FLAC (knowing it was FLAC) it genuinely sounded better to me. I "sighted" tested myself dozens of times, and was always sure I could tell a definite improvement with the FLAC.

 

Then someone challenged me to double blind test myself using a plugin to Foobar2k - I failed. I tried it several times and the results showed a similar ratio to guessing every time. 

 

If anyone thinks they can tell FLAC from 320CBR (and I mean GOOD CBR - like the error correction LAME CBR than EAC ripps) - they really should DB test themselves and see. I think they might be surprised.

post #113 of 257

I'm not surprised that more people don't want to try a DB test on familiar music.  I don't understand, but I'm no longer surprised.  It's like a religion.  Is it worth having a Ferrari if it performs and looks exactly like a Nissan Sentra?

post #114 of 257
Of course not.

People want different things. You might buy a Ferrari for showing off, it's engine note, it's brutal acceleration, the way it drives comfortably, or maybe for track racing. Or all the above.

You could buy an audeze to show off, or it's bass extension, or it's flat bass curve, or it's creamy midrange, or it's grainy treble, or all of it.

Can you drive the Ferrari on a 80mph road? Well you might drive it across Europe and it's comfortable.

Can you use an audeze on 128kbps? I'd hate to think the guy that buys an audeze does not have have most of his music as 320kbps
post #115 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonitus mirus View Post
 

I'm not surprised that more people don't want to try a DB test on familiar music.  I don't understand, but I'm no longer surprised.  It's like a religion.  Is it worth having a Ferrari if it performs and looks exactly like a Nissan Sentra?

 

And what, may I ask, is wrong with a Nissan Sentra?  ;)

 

Actually I think this whole DBT thingy is beside the point. It isn't what you can or can't detect under test conditions, it's what you can or can't detect during normal listening. What else matters, after all? Even those posters here who claim the difference is night and day, is it so in normal listening? Do you suddenly sit up and think, yes, that was definitely an MP3 moment--I'll have to re-rip to FLAC immediately. Do you reflect afterwards that there was something vaguely dissatisfying about your listening session and the problem was almost certainly 320 MP3. I'm prepared to grant that you can pick the difference in a test, even a DBT, but in normal listening...?

post #116 of 257

To me 320 sounds grittier grainier ever so slightly compared to flac it's like how 192 is grainy and harsh compared to 320 the gap is just smaller but you can hear it just about.

post #117 of 257
By the way I have most of my music as flac even though you can't tell the difference.

Let me put it this way. If you know know your car economy is 54.5 mpg and you want to go 54.5 miles you dump all your fuel and only take one gallon?
post #118 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by joker97 View Post

By the way I have most of my music as flac even though you can't tell the difference.

Let me put it this way. If you know know your car economy is 54.5 mpg and you want to go 54.5 miles you dump all your fuel and only take one gallon?

 

Sure, as long as you only ever need to make this one trip. What would be the point of spending more on fuel if you already have enough for the trip?  How would having 2 gallons or more help you to arrive at your destination?

post #119 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by joker97 View Post

By the way I have most of my music as flac even though you can't tell the difference.

Let me put it this way. If you know know your car economy is 54.5 mpg and you want to go 54.5 miles you dump all your fuel and only take one gallon?

 

That's a poor analogy.  This question deals more of the physical limits of the human hearing (average human hearing anyway).  It would be like saying, I've got a screen that supports a 1.024 MP image at max resolution (of the screen).  Sure, you could use a 16 MP image as your wallpaper, but you won't notice any difference in contrast to the 1 MP one... 

post #120 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by c64 View Post
 

To me 320 sounds grittier grainier ever so slightly compared to flac it's like how 192 is grainy and harsh compared to 320 the gap is just smaller but you can hear it just about.

 

In normal listening? Or when you're specifically listening for it? And even if in normal listening, is "hearing it just about" going to affect your listening pleasure that much?  Just as with the difference between two good quality phones (only much less), once you've been listening for a few minutes you automatically adjust to the difference.

 

BTW, I don't hear 192 as grainy and harsh.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Is it worth getting really high-end headphones if your source is 320kbps audio files?