[JamesL]

As it stands now, the results are
39 - 69 - 39

As I see it, of the people who tested between the compressed and lossless, theres the half that chose the right track, the other half that chose the 'wrong one', and the third half(paradox not intended), who's getting mixed results..

Don't get me wrong - I definitely do think there is a difference, no doubt, and it makes much more sense than those who think a their silver LOD adds clarity and soundstage to their music.

As for me, I use lossless for archival purposes.

 

[Agnostic]

I think there is a common misunderstanding that a few abx listening test will prove that a lossless format is tranparent. At best it only proves the likelihood that the particular samples were transparent to the people who performed the test.

Transparency on a few 10 second samples hardly proves tranparency in general. In fact transparency is by definition unprovable.

I have seen a few reliable abx test where people could distinguish 320kbps from lossless. I myself have tested two v0 samples a while back myself on which I couldn't distinguish reliably (which by the way does not mean I couldn't hear a difference, I just couldn't reliably and consistently pinpoint it).

I do however think that for all intents and purposes v0 is transparent for portable use, but you may hear differences between lossless and high bitrate mp3 on a good home system depending on the type of music and how good your ears are and/or whether you know what to listen for.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

(which by the way does not mean I couldn't hear a difference, I just couldn't reliably and consistently pinpoint it).

I really don't see how there's any meaningful difference there... saying 'I can't reliably pinpoint it but I still know that the difference is there' to me is not a very credible statement.

.

 

[G-man]

maybe it is just me, but to me the difference is evident even from a crappy source and headphones. And this is with a blind test. And i have got crappy hearings. Or, maybe my non-existent psychic senses are so strong that I know whether or not the track is lossless, thus creating a placebo affect. you can decide which is true.

 

[Deadneddz]

im just curious to find out the threshold where lossless really makes a difference compared with high bitrate mp3s.

I mean i cant hear the difference yet.

Will i hear it after spending $2000.00?

 

[Radar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DARKHAVEN /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't misunderstand me, I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to a few others who were a bit militant about their opinions. Some people's absolute certainty about what can and can't be heard was surprising to me. I wasn't pointing that at you.

Sorry, I thought it was directed at me.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadneddz /img/forum/go_quote.gif im just curious to find out the threshold where lossless really makes a difference compared with high bitrate mp3s. I mean i cant hear the difference yet. Will i hear it after spending $2000.00?

This is highly subjective and dependent on the individual. No one can say whether you will hear a difference regardless of how much you spend.

 

[moriez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope. Well, cant hear the difference between 128, 192 or 320. Never tried lossless really.

Today I was A/B-ing 192 and VBR (and up) over the stereo and boy I am overwhelmed by the difference. Im excited that for the first time I can really hear a biiig difference. What does that tell me about my portable setup? Crap?

 

[nc8000]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILikeMusic /img/forum/go_quote.gif I really don't see how there's any meaningful difference there... saying 'I can't reliably pinpoint it but I still know that the difference is there' to me is not a very credible statement. .

Actually I found his statement very meaningfull as that is exactly the way it is for me. I can often tell that there is a difference but I can not reliably tell wich song is lossless and wich is 320.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nc8000 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually I found his statement very meaningfull as that is exactly the way it is for me. I can often tell that there is a difference but I can not reliably tell wich song is lossless and wich is 320.

If you can't tell which is which then the word 'difference' has a different meaning for you and Webster.

 

[SR-71Panorama]

With hard drives coming down in price, it is utterly pointless to do anything less than full resolution. You'll just end up re-ripping in a year or two when curiosity will no doubt get the best of you. You can right now buy a 1 Terra byte hard drive for $150.

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif With hard drives coming down in price, it is utterly pointless to do anything less than full resolution.

On a PC or for archival purposes, agreed. I think the only real controversy surrounds what to use on a portable player where space is often limited (especially on today's flash-based players.) In that example it's the use of lossless that is pointless. Just depends on your intended use. Best option IMO is to archive in lossless then just convert to high-bitrate compressed for your player.

.

 

[sbulack]

I'm using a 5.5G 80GB Redwine iMod. My comparison is between 320 kbps mp3's and apple lossless. While I can hear the added detail in the lossless tracks, the overall sound from the iMod is more "constipated", hence less open, less transparent and less enjoyable to me than the 320 kbps mp3's. Overall, I prefer listening to 320 kbps than apple lossless on my iMod. I'm wondering if the iMod really has the horsepower to losslessly decompress the apple lossless file and play it in real time - and if the constipation I'm hearing is the result of the iMod having to strain a bit at the effort. I've tried apple lossless with a number of really well recorded albums where I thought I'd get the best benefit, and I've ended up sticking with 320 kbps mp3's for purely overall sound quality reasons, as my iMod is less than 40% full and that's not likely to increase by much.

 

[monolith]

Where's the "sometimes" option.

For almost all music, high bitrate mp3s are totally transparent. For some, they're definitely not (ie. not a subtle, flowery language difference but a big obvious artifact-full one).

 

[wnmnkh]

I can't.