i believe the conclusion from a previous thread comparing FLAC (lossless) to 320 was that the sound needed to be deafingly loud for there to be any physical difference from the get-go not to mention how hard it is to tell the diff
Originally Posted by Brian loves music /img/forum/go_quote.gif i believe the conclusion from a previous thread comparing FLAC (lossless) to 320 was that the sound needed to be deafingly loud for there to be any physical difference from the get-go not to mention how hard it is to tell the diff
so probably not
true, but only on low end systems. and even then, i can hear the difference on my 20 pound headphones. and that was on a blind test. twice. and i have crappy hearing with tinnitus.
Hey there......it is my belief that they do sound identical to most ears. However, my theory is this, store you music lossless..........on an external hard-drive, and then convert the music to the smallest bit rate you can hear as transparent.......
Believe it or not, I find 160 Kbps VBR AAC to be transparent
Ok, thanks and yea it already is on a portable hard drive. I am using it mainly on a iPod so storage is kind of a problem, that is why I asked. But sorry for wrong area, didn't know where else to put.
Only you can tell if they sound the same. As it differ between person, gear, music, encoder, and more.
But the general opinion are that a well encoded MP3 file (using latest stable LAME) at ~192kbps or higher tend to be transparent for most music/people.
Apple Lossless is the safe bet though, since its lossless. Then you don't have to worry if there are an audible loss or not, like you would with MP3.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.