Recent content by stonesfan129
-
Testing audiophile claims and myths
I wonder what kind of digital equipment they are playing things through where it doesn't sound transparent the way his LPs do.- stonesfan129
- Post #13,834
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
Bluetooth must just suck cause I swear I can tell a difference in the sound between files over Bluetooth and ones over a wired connection (both sources being the exact same FLAC file).- stonesfan129
- Post #648
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
I really like Opus but there are just so few players that support it. Besides, I have space for FLAC on my portables anyway.- stonesfan129
- Post #638
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
My FiiO M6 doesn't support Opus. I mainly just convert everything to 256k Apple AAC which I cannot distinguish from lossless on it anyway.- stonesfan129
- Post #624
- Forum: Sound Science
-
Dolby A and some early CDs
I won't lie. I really like the sound on some modern CD remasters despite how some people feel about them. I think now that the loudness wars thing has kind of cooled off, brickwalling isn't as bad as it used to be. For example, a few I really like are Cream/Eric Clapton, Rolling Stones...- stonesfan129
- Post #4
- Forum: Sound Science
-
iPod Touch 7th Generation (2019)
Interesting... They must have upgraded the DAC in the iPod Touch 7G because my 6G fails to sync 24/96 ALAC files. On a side note, I can't imagine why I'd need 24/96 files since it's beyond the height of my hearing and in AIFF would take up a ridiculous amount of space.- stonesfan129
- Post #77
- Forum: Portable Source Gear
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
Have you done any listening tests using their AAC encoder (Fraunhofer FDK-AAC)? I didn't think it sounded as good as the iTunes one at the lower bitrates and I have to wonder if it has some kind of low-pass filtering going on. At the highest VBR setting (-m5) it says they don't do that, but I...- stonesfan129
- Post #616
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
When you say Fraunhofer are you talking about their AAC or MP3 encoder? I understood that generally AAC is more efficient than any MP3 encoder.- stonesfan129
- Post #614
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
I ran some listening tests awhile back on a much higher quality setup than what I own. I took an album I knew well and made a WAV file then from that WAV file I created several MP3 files with LAME (320, -V0, -V2, -V4 and -V5) and several AAC versions with iTunes (256, 192, 128, 96). My...- stonesfan129
- Post #612
- Forum: Sound Science
-
iPod Touch 7th Generation (2019)
No, the maximum that will sync is 24/48. 24/96 will fail to sync.- stonesfan129
- Post #75
- Forum: Portable Source Gear
-
iPod Touch 7th Generation (2019)
The iPod Touch doesn't support FLAC natively in its "Music" app. It supports it through the "Files" app or something. Otherwise there have always been third-party apps which could be installed to play it.- stonesfan129
- Post #72
- Forum: Portable Source Gear
-
iPod Touch 7th Generation (2019)
I believe the maximum that will sync onto iPod Touch is 48kHz/24-bit as Apple Lossless and I believe they are downsampled to 16-bit on playback.- stonesfan129
- Post #68
- Forum: Portable Source Gear
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
I don't see the point you're trying to make here. And with storage space that keeps on increasing, why shouldn't I just use lossless or MP3/AAC above 192kbps? For what it's worth, I have never used Winamp AAC. I have always used either Apple AAC or FDK AAC (when I needed AAC) or just LAME...- stonesfan129
- Post #600
- Forum: Sound Science
-
FLAC vs. 320 Mp3
That's not surprising since it's a more efficient codec. I just do not see the point of using Ogg Vorbis when LAME MP3 or Apple AAC do perfectly fine at the bitrates I'm using.- stonesfan129
- Post #596
- Forum: Sound Science
-
Graphs are dumb, change my mind
I think they can be useful. But yes, ultimately they cannot determine if something sounds good or not.- stonesfan129
- Post #7
- Forum: Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors