Can You Tell The Difference Between WMA Lossless and 320k MP3?

[TheMarchingMule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nauxolo /img/forum/go_quote.gif I haven't tried WMA Lossless, but assuming all lossless is the same, I DO hear a difference between FLAC and 320kbps. However, in a blind test, I am unable to tell which one is which, and one particular format is not inherently better than the other. I suppose the FLAC is 'better', mostly because it has a greater range of dynamics. The 320kbps sounds like something that has been slightly processed to sound louder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILikeMusic /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Ahaha, that's a funny reply.

I think nauxolo's problem is that the sound levels of the two files are not balanced, and he's inadverdently is admitting that he is afffected by placebo.

 

[shigzeo]

i can tell a difference between flac and wav, but only if i have my macalister amp powering my rsa stealth as a preamp and coming from dac11 and macbook pro. of course i am listening to ue11 and there is no moving air in the room.

but in that case, i can feel the tongues of singers in wav but the flac version, only hear the wet parts of their mouths. for cymbals and bass, it is just a slight tremour in the wav where the flac has a sheen, probably where information is lost.

 

[Bradan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif i can tell a difference between flac and wav, but only if i have my macalister amp powering my rsa stealth as a preamp and coming from dac11 and macbook pro. of course i am listening to ue11 and there is no moving air in the room. but in that case, i can feel the tongues of singers in wav but the flac version, only hear the wet parts of their mouths. for cymbals and bass, it is just a slight tremour in the wav where the flac has a sheen, probably where information is lost.

complete proof of the placebo effect.

he can tell the difference between uncompressed and compressed lossless audio, when played on his super expensive equipment. yay.

 

[vYu223]

 

[shigzeo]

isn't this thread proof of placebo? terms like loss of transience etc have nothing to do with what is heard, but only what is felt emotionally by the foreknowledge that one file contains less information than another. the point of my post unfortunately is what i have to explain: we don't know what to listen for or if we are listening for anything.

rather, we know the two files have differences and we listen for them. i have seen someone listen to the exact same file: both instances ALAC format ripped from cd. one file was said to be mp3 at 192kbps (a respectable rate) and the other lossless. guess what happened? there were differences heard.

then, when blind tested, the person heard differences too. the same exact file: duplicated.

popcorn is nice.

 

[Bradan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif isn't this thread proof of placebo? terms like loss of transience etc have nothing to do with what is heard, but only what is felt emotionally by the foreknowledge that one file contains less information than another. the point of my post unfortunately is what i have to explain: we don't know what to listen for or if we are listening for anything. rather, we know the two files have differences and we listen for them. i have seen someone listen to the exact same file: both instances ALAC format ripped from cd. one file was said to be mp3 at 192kbps (a respectable rate) and the other lossless. guess what happened? there were differences heard. then, when blind tested, the person heard differences too. the same exact file: duplicated. popcorn is nice.

im not so sure. I can actually tell the difference, but it takes allot of effort, they sound different, neither is better to my ears though. I can pass an ABX with effort.

I'm 17 though, that might have something to do with it.