Do you hear the difference? A test
Mar 27, 2008 at 12:44 AM Post #91 of 139

Originally Posted by Joeshmo39 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Yeah i got it right with my SR60s running out of my onboard. I agreed the better clip sounded fuller and I got more of the lower range background notes during that clip. Not sure if I could do it again though and I have some 128 KBPS stuff on my computer and I feel the quality on that is alot worse than that clip, it's like night and day there.

Agree again.
Mar 27, 2008 at 12:48 AM Post #92 of 139
Got it right with my d2000's out of my 2move, the highs were higher and the bass more prominent in the 320.
Mar 27, 2008 at 1:10 AM Post #94 of 139

Originally Posted by L7R /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Those who couldn't get it right here's a little help.
Most common mp3 artefact is a "metallic", (pitch like) sound which is easier to hear in mid to higher frequencies. I can't explain it better with my ankward english. It's very easy to hear if you listen pavarotti's voice. Also there's a like "flanger" (correct this if you know the right word) effect in cymbals and voice (very usual in digital compression flaw and easily detect on cymbals/hi-hat). It's like a whisper/hissing outside his voice (little left and right from the middle singing position).
Only low-bitrate codec which doesn't suffer these issues so much is old ATRAC3 132kbps, although there's still other compression artefacts.

btw, I also used my onboard audio (gigabyte MB) with tube amp + MS2i.

Even with this help, I can't hear it. Unless it's in the first few seconds and I can switch back and forth, my memory of what the previous clip sounds like gets wiped out.
Mar 27, 2008 at 1:18 AM Post #95 of 139
I got it right through my Proline 750 and Meier Move DAC+amp, but honestly, the difference was so subtle that I had to listen at least 5 times each. I am very surprised that 128 can sound so close to 320.
Mar 27, 2008 at 1:21 AM Post #96 of 139
I honestly hear none of the clipping others are refering too. Although I do hear more air and refinement of the upper and lower end frequencies in subsequent listenings of the 320kbps version. But as a result I'm thoroughly tired of that clip.
Mar 27, 2008 at 4:53 AM Post #98 of 139
It is strange though. Some people can hear the difference straight away out of their laptop speaker while others, like me, are hard pressed to hear any difference at all using good equipment.
Mar 27, 2008 at 5:00 AM Post #99 of 139
umm yeah, i thought it was kinda easy. not bragging, just sounded very different.
Mar 27, 2008 at 6:26 AM Post #100 of 139

Originally Posted by joay /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I bet the flac blows these away. Die Lossy die.

I got it too... Creative Audigy Sound Card through my UE11's....
Mar 27, 2008 at 8:54 AM Post #102 of 139
yay i got it right too! had to listen to it a few times. i'm using onboard audio to my friend's HD595, which i'm trying to compare to my AD700s. the castanets on the 320kbps sounded like more real instruments while on the 128 kbps, it just sounded like sounds. (articulate, i kno)
Mar 27, 2008 at 9:18 AM Post #103 of 139
daym i got it wrong. i should have known better. i just plugged my hd600 right into my lil compaq notebook lol. the thing that got me was clip B was louder but clip A was more balanced. meh oh well i'm sticking to my Apple Lossless anywayz lol.

Users who are viewing this thread