Commander, are you using the noise cancellation, it could be masking the details. It also depends on the actual source of your .flac files. If they were derived from an already compressed mp3, there may not be a discernible difference. Lastly, do you otherwise enjoy the sound of your Bose?
Originally Posted by nor_spoon /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sure is not much of a difference. For those of you who are left on the surface, and never dive down into the depths of music, that is.
In fairness, the difference is only really large when you have very very good equipment. Otherwise, it is infinitesimally small compared to going from ibuds (for example) to a decent pair of headphones.
Once you have been in audio for a long time and have an excellent and revealing setup, then the difference can become meaningful.
HOWEVER, this upgrade is free. And as such is mathematically one of the best value in audio.
I can clearly hear a loss in detail and overall tonal quality with bitrates lower than 160 KB/s.
160 KB/s and higer for me is the point where it gets harder to find differences at a conscious level, with this I mean switching between different bitrates, comparing side by side I find it impossible to hear any differences.
But if I listen for some hours to tracks in losseless or AIFF format and then play the same tracks in lower bitrate I feel there's something missing.
Call it presence?
I think higher quality files separate the instruments a lot more. Lower than 320kbps and the music gets sort of mushy and doesn't have the impact or detail of higher quality files.
I had a John Coltrane LP ripped at 192kbps mp3, and found a proper one in 24/96 flac. Unless you happened to be deaf, I'm sure you'd notice the difference there.
I have found that my ears have to get used to a new source before I can tell the difference.
For example, when I first tested FLAC's instead of mp3's I really didn't notice anything. However, I decided to hang in there and continued listening to FLAC's. After a few weeks I went back to the mp3's and I was able to notice what I was missing. It's almost as if you have to re-train your brain so that it knows what to look for.
I have found that this effect applies to headphones as well. Now that I know this I am able to take the time necessary to really listen to something before making my judgment of it.
I can tell the difference with no source other than a computer sound card. I can tell the difference with my $40 PK3. I can tell the difference blindfolded with my hands tied behind my back.... hate to say it , but you need better headphones.
If I strain I can tell a difference between 128 and FLAC on some songs. Otherwise it sounds the same to me.
V0 saves on space by almost completely cutting frequencies above 20k which you shouldn't be able to hear anyway, and marginally reducing detail from 16k to 20k. V2 does the same except cuts more off in the 16k to 20k region. Considering that a lot of songs simply don't have a lot of detail in that range, I can't help calling baloney on people who claim the difference between 320 and FLAC is night and day.
I mean and that's just an indisputable fact in some cases.
Here's a jazz song:
No way you'd be able to tell the difference between FLAC and V2.
Here's a piano solo:
Again, absolutely no way you can hear the difference, probably even with far lower bitrates.
Here, you can see what I mean for yourself too. Turn the volume down so you don't deafen yourself and click on 16k. Do you really think you're missing out on anything by having a slight amount of detail cut from frequencies above this point? I do not think so.
Originally Posted by Commanderloochy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't tell the difference between a 160kbps and flac. I'm using bose quiet comfort 2 headphones, and listening files on my computer (no amp). Should I be able to hear the difference with this equipment? Or am I just deaf?
Well there's your problem. Try listening through a better pair of headphones, and you will hear a difference.
Originally Posted by buddhashenglong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Commander, are you using the noise cancellation, it could be masking the details. It also depends on the actual source of your .flac files. If they were derived from an already compressed mp3, there may not be a discernible difference. Lastly, do you otherwise enjoy the sound of your Bose?
The noise cancellation can't be turned off so I am using noise cancellation. My flac files are good, I know that for sure. I do enjoy the sound of the bose but I know there are much better cans out there and I want to get a decent pair.
Just to clarify: I know bose are poor headphones. I started this thread to make sure that it was the headphones that weren't allowing me to hear the difference.
I'm probably going to get a pair of k702's and a compass amp/dac. I'm hoping this new setup will blow me away, compared to bose q2 without an amp.
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.