[linglingjr]

I'll start off by saying I enjoy a big variety of music: Modern rap/hip hop (definitely very little mainstream lol), some dubstep, Indie Rock all the way back to Classic rock (CCR, The Doors, Rolling stones ect..) and a few others...
 
Over the summer I got myself a pair of AKG k272s and a cmoy bb amp for Christmas. Before I got the amp I had almost all of my songs in 320kbps mp3s. How ever after I got the amp I downloaded a Johnny Cash song in Flac just for sh!ts and giggles and noticed a difference in quality. My point is it seems like listening to some music genres in flac vs 320kbps mp3s don't really offer a benefit. Sure you're hearing the the music more clearly but it seems like some times there is nothing else to hear? For example I downloaded a The Who discography all in FLAC, when i compared it to the same songs in 320kbps I thought wow this sounds much better. But when I downloaded Lupe Fiasco in FLAC I didn't really notice any difference. Rap doesn't have very much going on in the background compared to Rock and what not. I don't know just thought it was kind of interesting because Rock sounds a ton better in flac but it seems like some genres don't sound any different, and I know it's not because some are fake flac files.

 

[zeno]

Higher frequencies come out more the higher the bit rate.....if the music is very bass heavy one would not notice as much of a difference between 320kbs and FLAC or Apple Lossless

 

[wongle]

I noticed that as well when I converted Lupe Fiasco's "The Cool" cd to wav lossless onto my walkman and noticed no difference with the 320kbps counterparts. Maybe the album is poorly mastered

 

[Tetsuma]

If you don't notice a difference, then the encoder has succeeded at what it was designed to do.

 

[RMac]

I generally don't hear a difference between flac and V0 but maybe that is because of the limitations of my setup (laptop + Grado SR-80)

 

[ManchildProdigy]

I think a lot of the benefit of lossless encoding comes when you're working with music that was well recorded in the first place.  I have a lot of stuff that is so poorly mixed and mastered that the lossy vs. lossless debate is pretty much pointless.  But when working with good source material, the difference can be truly astounding.

 

[Angelbelow]

Yeah, I think anything thats 2 instruments or 3 notes long wouldn't matter as far as FLAC and mp3 goes.

 

[sgrossklass]

I get along with LAME -V 6 -q 0 quality MP3s just fine, and have been quite unable to ABX 'em. This, however, assumes that the combination of MP3 decoder and ReplayGain ensure that no clipping occurs on playback even if peak amplitudes are larger than 1 (I've seen more than 1.5 times full scale on some particularly "hot" tracks). Both Fb2k and Rockbox on my Clip+ get that right (unlike the player's stock firmware), though obviously I tend to listen to FLACs on the computer so it's mainly important for the portable player.
 
Incidentally, the same measures also tend to ensure that there are no issues with intersample-overs on playback (I've seen peaks between +1.5 dB and more than +2.0 dB when upsampling real-life "hot" CD material to 176.4k via SSRC).

 

[bigshot]

I haven't found anything that AAC 256 VBR doesn't reproduce perfectly. It all depends on the codec and bitrate, not so much on the kind of music.

 

[sgrossklass]

Quote:

It all depends on the codec and bitrate, not so much on the kind of music.

Well, yes and no. When looking at resulting bitrates for VBR tracks for a given quality setting, you can definitely see some variation depending on material. It is not always a direct correlation, but e.g. pop tends to yield higher than average bitrates while classical orchestra works usually are on the other side.

 

[Achmedisdead]

I think FLAC is silly for portable use. LAME V-2 to V-0 (or 320k's that are already encoded when I get them) are good enough for me portably and sound just fine. Maybe if I had higher-end headphones I would feel differently.....I do want to get something better, but money doesn't grow on trees.....lol.

 

[logwed]

Quote:

I think FLAC is silly for portable use. LAME V-2 to V-0 (or 320k's that are already encoded when I get them) are good enough for me portably and sound just fine. Maybe if I had higher-end headphones I would feel differently.....I do want to get something better, but money doesn't grow on trees.....lol.

FLAC has no utility for me either, I listen critically only on CDs (because I like CDs). The music on my computer is just for stuffing my iPod, so 320 or 256 VBR is fine with me.

 

[mcmurray]

Lossless all the way.
 
Its not 1998 anymore guys.

 

[Achmedisdead]

Quote:

Lossless all the way.
 
Its not 1998 anymore guys.

What year it is, is irrelevant to me....unless you set me up with a high-capacity DAP without a spinning hard drive, that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. Then I might consider loading  DAP with FLAC, if you give me headphones good enough for me to hear the difference between my lossy encodes and FLACs.

 

[bigshot]

Lossless is perfect for people with narrow musical tastes.