[Viperx116]

I have a Senn 280 pro with hundreds of hours of burn in. Recently I've been doing some blind ABX testing. For all the songs I couldn't hear the difference between 128kb and 320kb. The only exception was a 192kb vs lossless file, where I could hear some static in the 192kb version.

I always thought I had great hearing too. Don't know if I should upgrade or just stick with the 280 since I don't know if I'll even hear any improvements.

 

[moonboy403]

Do you know what to listen for?

It also depends on what you're listening to.

 

[.coco]

It really could be a ton of things. Probably has a lot to do with whatever you are using as a source player.


For the compression situation, the differences in compression past 128 is really played up here. If you arent going to rip lossless, ripping between 128 and 320 isnt going to be much different to your ears, even on top equipment.

 

[Viperx116]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you know what to listen for? It also depends on what you're listening to.

Not really. I really just listen for clarity, amount of bass and the dynamic range.

 

[moonboy403]

IMO, treble and spatial cues are the most apparent give away for 128kps live songs. Then comes the tightness of the bass (not the amount of bass).

 

[.coco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viperx116 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not really. I really just listen for clarity, amount of bass and the dynamic range.

Yeah, this is probably more to do with your headphones/dac/amp than source files.

 

[Oggranak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by .coco /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you arent going to rip lossless, ripping between 128 and 320 isnt going to be much different to your ears, even on top equipment.

Please tell me you're joking. I can easily tell the difference between 320 and 256. 192 is just plain bad and I can't even listen to 128kbps. The difference between 320 and 192/128 is far bigger than the difference between 320 and lossless, IMO.

 

[White_Noise]

I don't want to start anything, but I have a hard time believing that most people can regularly tell the difference between 256kbps and 320kbps unless it is with music they are intimately familiar with or with very high end equipment. I don't want to call you a liar, but the only possibilities I see are that you have a $60,000 setup, remarkably prodigious hearing, or are exaggerating. I agree that the difference between 128 and 192 is substantial, but there is only a very small degree of difference above ~192.

 

[Oggranak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by White_Noise /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't want to start anything, but I have a hard time believing that most people can regularly tell the difference between 256kbps and 320kbps unless it is with music they are intimately familiar with or with very high end equipment. I don't want to call you a liar, but the only possibilities I see are that you have a $60,000 setup, remarkably prodigious hearing, or are exaggerating. I agree that the difference between 128 and 192 is substantial, but there is only a very small degree of difference above ~192.

Are you serious? I could tell the difference with PortaPros. We're talking MP3, right? I ripped Fragile (Yes) to 192 and 320 for the purpose of comparison and listened to "Heart of the Sunrise". It was night and day.

Right now I'm ripping an album to 192/256/320kbps. I'll tell you my results, maybe it was a bad rip before. We'll see.

 

[myk7000]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oggranak /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please tell me you're joking. I can easily tell the difference between 320 and 256. 192 is just plain bad and I can't even listen to 128kbps. The difference between 320 and 192/128 is far bigger than the difference between 320 and lossless, IMO.

....okay sucks to be you buddy lol

 

[olblueyez]

Do 128 for a week or two and then switch to 320, then you will hear the difference. Switching back and fourth quickly wont tell you much, except the fact that your confused.

 

[Oggranak]

Well, I'll admit the 256 was exaggerated. It's not that different from 320. But I can tell the difference between 320 and 128.

I admit, I was wrong, most of the difference is just bad rips. But nonetheless, there is a difference between 192 and 320, however subtle it may be. My comparison was with Squonk by Genesis, I'll have to do this with with a more complex song to truly test it.

And I'll do it again when my amp arrives, more importantly.. currently I'm using Zune->DT880 '05. Not the last word in detail. I'll get back to you on this.

 

[anadin]

Get a decent pair of headphones then your easily be able to tell the difference.

 

[Viperx116]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do 128 for a week or two and then switch to 320, then you will hear the difference. Switching back and fourth quickly wont tell you much, except the fact that your confused.

I'll try that.

 

[TopPop]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moonboy403 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMO, treble and spatial cues are the most apparent give away for 128kps live songs.

Couldn't agree more.