[ILikeMusic]

When evaluating responses to these threads always remember the important formula x = y x .01, where

x is the number of people who can really resolve between high-bitrate compressed and lossless tracks on a portable player and

y is the number of individuals who think they can.

 

[plonter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILikeMusic /img/forum/go_quote.gif When evaluating responses to these threads always remember the important formula x = y x .01, where x is the number of people who can really resolve between high-bitrate compressed and lossless tracks on a portable player and y is the number of individuals who think they can.

i think that as long as there are some who CAN tell the difference,even if it's 1 in a million, than it says that there is something to it, and i personally feel obliged not to compromise.

 

[Doo Doo Brown]

When I've done comparisons to see if I can tell the difference, I can't. But sometimes I'll be listening to something lossy and I'll be unhappy with the sound, and because I know it's lossy, I think that lossless would sound better. In fact, it's probably just a combination of the recording and my equipment, which at this point is not quite up to hi-fi standards. But with an ancient 4g 40gig ipod, space is limited, so I'm content with lossy. Once I upgrade to a 120gigs, I'll probably start converting to lossless, if for no other reason than peace of mind.

 

[iriverdude]

Can tell between high bitrate Mp3 and lossless but so much much high bitrate OGG and lossless. I wish you can buy 1TB 1.8" drives though, that way don't need to rearrange music on the DAP and also have a secondary backup of music collection.

 

[peter312]

I find that I can't readily tell the difference between lossless and 320kbps files on my iPod, even when played through a decent amp and speakers (or headphones). I therefore use 320kbps MP3's (for classical) and v0 MP3's (for pop and rock), as my iPod Classic sometimes skips with lossless files.

However, if I burn both types of file to an audio CD and play them on a decent full sized CD player, I can more often than not tell the difference.

 

[synaesthetic]

I can't even tell 192kbps MP3 from 320kbps MP3.

 

[Buckster]

yes - when I had my 5.5G IPOD

Lossless vs 320kbps MP3/AAC - lossless sounded better

one good thing about Lossless - unless I am mistaken - lossless is not prone to clipping ? if it was - it would not be lossless

wheras even high bitrate non-lossless - is prone to clipping, which unless something is done about it (a faff) - then its definately noticeable on playback

my Sony doesn't support lossless one of the reasons I'm getting rid of it (perhaps a Fuze instead)

 

[krmathis]

I sure can tell a difference.
Of course it all depends on the complexity of the audio, the bitrate its lossy encoded to, and the encoder used. But I have found no lossy encoder to be 100% transparent for me, even on my lousy iPod nano rig.

 

[wolfen68]

Any difference between (good) lossy and lossless is dwarfed by the differences in quality from one recording to another.

 

[Barock]

Obviously there is going to be a difference, but for reasons of space I'm still happy with 192-320k MP3 on the DAP. For normal portable use, ie. in a train or on the street, careful listening might be able to distinguish them, certainly between 192k MP3 and say, FLAC, but I can live with it. I can listen to FLAC and wav etc at home where it's more important.

 

[panda]

applying that logic:

regular bottled water vs $20 bottled water. you don't notice any difference in taste, but someone in a million does, so why take the chance right? gotta get that nice fancy bottle every time...

 

[Navyblue]

Btw guys, the two variables stated in the title are "you" and "your portable setup", and it's not about whether lossy is as good as lossless or otherwise.

 

[mape00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckster /img/forum/go_quote.gif one good thing about Lossless - unless I am mistaken - lossless is not prone to clipping ? if it was - it would not be lossless wheras even high bitrate non-lossless - is prone to clipping, which unless something is done about it (a faff) - then its definately noticeable on playback

I think you might be confusing data compression and dynamic range compression here. Dynamic range compression is usually done at mastering to make recordings sound louder. This, in many cases, introduces clipping. Metallica's Death Magnetic is a good example of this. It doesn't matter if you compress Death Magnetic with flac or mp3, though, it will still sound like crap. The only remedy is to get your hands on a copy that wasn't slaughtered at the mastering (such as the Guitar Hero version).

We're talking about data compression here, and to the best of my knowledge, this shouldn't introduce clipping. (I've checked lots of mp3s in audacity and I've never found that mp3 compression or similar introduced clipping artifacts.)

 

[Buckster]

I thought high level recordings (like a lot of recent releases) are very prone to clipping when compressed to MP3,AAC, OGG etc - no matter the bitrate

something to do with any artefacts that are created in the waveforms when compressed in a lossy way - if you are almost at "1" gain - then you haven't much remove for manuv.

as soon as you get to 1 - clipping occurs

so as I see it - lossy codecs = not perfect re-represenation of the waveforms, and this can mean they can clip

Lossless should be perfect re-representation - therefore will not clip


Quote:

Originally Posted by mape00 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you might be confusing data compression and dynamic range compression here. Dynamic range compression is usually done at mastering to make recordings sound louder. This, in many cases, introduces clipping. Metallica's Death Magnetic is a good example of this. It doesn't matter if you compress Death Magnetic with flac or mp3, though, it will still sound like crap. The only remedy is to get your hands on a copy that wasn't slaughtered at the mastering (such as the Guitar Hero version). We're talking about data compression here, and to the best of my knowledge, this shouldn't introduce clipping. (I've checked lots of mp3s in audacity and I've never found that mp3 compression or similar introduced clipping artifacts.)

 

[mape00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buckster /img/forum/go_quote.gif I thought high level recordings (like a lot of recent releases) are very prone to clipping when compressed to MP3,AAC, OGG etc - no matter the bitrate something to do with any artefacts that are created in the waveforms when compressed in a lossy way - if you are almost at "1" gain - then you haven't much remove for manuv. as soon as you get to 1 - clipping occurs so as I see it - lossy codecs = not perfect re-represenation of the waveforms, and this can mean they can clip Lossless should be perfect re-representation - therefore will not clip

I just checked a couple of Radiohead songs. One didn't clip in neither flac nor ogg vorbis format. Another song didn't clip in the flac version and one sample at -1 when compressed to ogg. This, however, doesn't really count as clipping as you need several samples in a row for that.