[Youth]

So I just got my new setup and I think it sounds amazing. Wondering if it's worth getting better quality files than 320 kbps?

 

[moriez]

Maybe yes, maybe no. The answer is up to you. Just try out converting some of your favourite songs or albums to lossless and lossy and flick through them. Personnally, I can't hear a difference.

 

[InternetSandman]

Maybe yes, maybe no. The answer is up to you. Just try out converting some of your favourite songs or albums to lossless and lossy and flick through them. Personnally, I can't hear a difference.

Converting a 320kbps file to a higher bitrate won't do anything, but converting a well recorded lossless file to 320kbps and comparing the two will tell you if it's worth investing in higher quality files

 

[moriez]

^ Good addition. Take one of your CD's and convert to 320 and FLAC for example. That's the idea.

 

[PurpleAngel]

  So I just got my new setup and I think it sounds amazing. Wondering if it's worth getting better quality files than 320 kbps?

 
Unless you have really higher end audio equipment, I really doubt it's worth it to make FLAC audio files from your music CDs.
Maybe you could get a few FLAC audios files of your favorite, see if you can hear a difference
Most of my audio files are around 256k to 320K, but I have a few of my ultimate favorites in FLAC (Pink Floyd, theme from Heavy Metal)

 

[cel4145]

Converting a 320kbps file to a higher bitrate won't do anything, but converting a well recorded lossless file to 320kbps and comparing the two will tell you if it's worth investing in higher quality files

This will only work if you do blind testing. Too easy to succumb to expectation bias.

 

[AlrightMister]

It might not be worth replacing your existing 320k mp3's but it might be worth it to you to rip to FLAC in the future. Storage is cheap, there's little downside to lossless. 

 

[manbear]

  Maybe yes, maybe no. The answer is up to you. Just try out converting some of your favourite songs or albums to lossless and lossy and flick through them. Personnally, I can't hear a difference.

+1

I can't hear any difference but I still use FLAC on my computer because there's no reason not to (storage is not an issue). For portable use however, I use 320 when I can. You will enjoy your music either way.

 

[Flee727]

Depends on your equipment and experience

 

[Trunksleo]

And how about the sound of for example spotify (normal and "premium"??)???

 

[adisib]

  And how about the sound of for example spotify (normal and "premium"??)???

 
Spotify free on desktop is 160 kbps OGG Vorbis, premium is 320 kbps OGG Vorbis.

 

[redsandvb]

Another nice thing about flac or other lossless types is that you won't get any additional quality loss (whether audible or not) if you decide to transcode to a lossy format.  I mean vs transcoding from one lossy to another lossy format, of course.

 

[crazychile]

Hard drives are cheap. Use lossless when you can. 320kbps is tolerable in a pinch, but I wouldn't want my whole collection lossy if I had a choice.

I use lossless at home, and usually Spotify premium when I'm on the go.

 

[IceUul]

For decent audiophile equipment you can hear the difference, how much? It depents the quality of the initial recording and your sound equipment. I have tested this on many tracks, my hearing is not perfect, for very simple songs i cannot hear difference between 320k and flac. But most music has some more details and things added if you use higher quality file.