TheMarchingMule
Headphoneus Supremus
Tonight, near midnight, I decided to re-rip a few of my Beatles CDs to see if I like FLAC (I never touched it before, because I was intimidated by the name for awhile). I chose 0 Compression, being the hardcore audiophile I am
, and ripped two CDs (Rubber Soul and Abbey Road). I put it on Rockbox on my iPod and took a quick listen through my KSC75s (all my really good stuff is being sent in for repair).
Placebo effect, maybe, but everything had more 'life' to it. Curious, I checked the bitrate of the FLAC against the ALAC, and found that for every track, the FLAC bitrate was at least 200+ more than the ALAC rips.
Now, I know that everybody here by now is saying this indeed is a placebo effect, but I find this very curious that two formats claim 'lossless,' yet come out with different bitrates (and my FLAC files are a hair bit bigger than the ALAC files).
Comments, please?
Edit: By the way, OT, but would you guys place The Beatles into the genre of 'Pop' or 'Rock'?
Placebo effect, maybe, but everything had more 'life' to it. Curious, I checked the bitrate of the FLAC against the ALAC, and found that for every track, the FLAC bitrate was at least 200+ more than the ALAC rips.
Now, I know that everybody here by now is saying this indeed is a placebo effect, but I find this very curious that two formats claim 'lossless,' yet come out with different bitrates (and my FLAC files are a hair bit bigger than the ALAC files).
Comments, please?
Edit: By the way, OT, but would you guys place The Beatles into the genre of 'Pop' or 'Rock'?