IEM's and Portables - Lossless is NOT overkill!

[Zanth]

I continually read from folks who use the likes of Ultimate Ears, Westones and Sensaphonics, that that when paired with a portable amp, and something like the iPod, that some form of lossy compression (albeit a high bitrate version) is more than suitable for tunes on the go. In fact, many proclaim that lossless files are overkill.

Given what has been said regarding the incredible resolution high-end IEM's supply, how can one proclaim that listening with the electromicroscopes of the headphone world warrant files that are lesser in quality than their PCM parents?

I admit that for the most part, I have 192 kb/s files on my iPod, mostly because that is how I obtained them. When using the Etymotic 4 series, I cringe often enough (heck this happens when using Grado HF-1's or 325i's as well!) because these files just don't provide the information that top phones deserve. When I rip, I rip to Apple Lossless exclusively. Much better on my ears. For those who use the high-end IEM's and proclaim lossy formats are enough, then why use IEM's at all?

 

[davidd]

my main problem is that 20GB isn't going to hold all that much lossless music, so I just use ogg vorbis on my portable, which sounds great to me

 

[halcyon]

Because I've tried the IEM test under blind conditions and properly encoded 192 kbps is transparent to me on perhaps c. 90% of music, maybe even more (this is when I perform a double blind test).

Also, I use IEMs, because they provide a good sound isolation to enable me to play less loud, preserving my hearing.

Obviously lossy uses so much less storage space, which is always precious.

Furthermore, modern digitally manipulated poip music is so crap to begin with that a few artifacts here and there are only icing on the cake

Now, if I'm listening to reference quality acoustic recordings, I'm probably doing it on my main rig, at home, with no background noises, from original cds. No need to compress, lossless or not.

 

[omendelovitz]

I use LAME alt extreme or alt standard w/ my E4's and I can tell a difference b/w using these and something like my Portapros, or even my 125's... I guess it's all in what you are able to hear... at the encoding levels to which I listen, I find that most music loses either some depth, or for simpler music, nothing at all... I can understand lossless on a beethoven, but for music like matchbox 20 or a lot of the simpler pop music, I don't think that there is enough musical detail to justify the lossless, given I'd probably need over a hundred gigs easy to run my portable at lossless...

 

[Spiritboxer]

My next dap will have the largest cap I can find and that's when the torturous task of re-ripping will begin. Until then, I'll have to be content with 320 AAC with which I'm not unhappy. Hey, I bought my first walkman back in '79 and I can't believe the equipment I own these days. It's like portable nirvana.

What's the differance between "all teeth" and "big grin" anyway?

 

[halcyon]

BTW, it's very easy to proclaim to hear even a dog's fart two million miles away, but doing that when you can't guess or cheat. It's much harder than you could have imagined.

Try it out for yourself on lossy material one day, and be prepared to be surprised (abx for 16 trials).

I've already done this test on myself on very good headphone gear and to fellow long term audiophiles on high-end loudspeaker gear.

It is really hard work, unless you've trained your hearing a lot. I've done it. Been listening to lossy compression since' 94 (the good old days of mpeg audio layer I), but it's still not easy.

Granted, my ears are not those of a young man anymore

 

[Zanth]

I just find it interesting given the wads of cash that go into a big rig, but when one considers portable setups, smacking down nigh a grand for some custom IEM's that resolve better than any full-sized can available and then passing lossy files through them...it's just well, why bother with these insane IEM's at all? Some will argue that they want the best sound while on the go, I would argue that given the incredible resolving power, the IEM's will actually corrupt this good intension by introducing the listener to volumes are nastiness . In these cases, it would be better to use less resolving phones, or just use the lossless files. I do understand the capacity issues etc...I have 60 gigs and that is not enough. If I wanted to rip my entire cd collection alone...I would need 100 gigs. Add in my mp3 albums and I need 1.1 TB's. It gets insane for sure, but I figure..I'd rather suffer with less than have my Ety's resolve lotsa crap.

Just one man's opinion of course.

 

[ServinginEcuador]

I am in the process of seeing if I can hear a difference between 320 AAC, 320 MP3 and Apple Lossless. This is using the UE-10, and once the Sensas return I'll use them too. As of now, with quite limited testing, I can't tell any difference. I copied them onto my iPod and ketp the original. I go through the same song, back-to-back, from lossy to lossless so I can skip nearly instantly for making comparisons.

 

[The D]

Quote:

Originally Posted by halcyon BTW, it's very easy to proclaim to hear even a dog's fart two million miles away, but doing that when you can't guess or cheat. It's much harder than you could have imagined. Try it out for yourself on lossy material one day, and be prepared to be surprised (abx for 16 trials). I've already done this test on myself on very good headphone gear and to fellow long term audiophiles on high-end loudspeaker gear. It is really hard work, unless you've trained your hearing a lot. I've done it. Been listening to lossy compression since' 94 (the good old days of mpeg audio layer I), but it's still not easy. Granted, my ears are not those of a young man anymore

ABXing lossy and lossless is not that hard, I have ABXed 256kbs Vorbis vs Wav and I can tell the difference 97% of the time (this is with quite a few tests BTW) with KSC75's!

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth why bother with these insane IEM's at all?

Because they sound better? Being able to tell the occasional artifact has almost nothing to do with the quality of what you listen to. IMO, that is.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth I continually read from folks who use the likes of Ultimate Ears, Westones and Sensaphonics, that that when paired with a portable amp, and something like the iPod, that some form of lossy compression (albeit a high bitrate version) is more than suitable for tunes on the go. In fact, many proclaim that lossless files are overkill.

It is, when you consider the tradeoffs involved in the battery life and also in my case, the lack of compatibility.

Quote:

Given what has been said regarding the incredible resolution high-end IEM's supply

Other people's quotes, not mine. My quote would be that they give the impression of incredible resolution. The bigger difference to me is the practical benefits they provide of isolation, efficiency and general handiness, all of which is delivered in a decent-sounding package. I find IEM's these days less suitable for commuting purposes, but there's nothing else I'd rather be using when flying.

Quote:

I admit that for the most part, I have 192 kb/s files on my iPod, mostly because that is how I obtained them. When using the Etymotic 4 series, I cringe often enough (heck this happens when using Grado HF-1's or 325i's as well!) because these files just don't provide the information that top phones deserve. When I rip, I rip to Apple Lossless exclusively. Much better on my ears. For those who use the high-end IEM's and proclaim lossy formats are enough, then why use IEM's at all?

256K MP3 is enough to provide transparency to me in the vast majority of cases. For me, it's the ideal balance between compatibility, quality and battery life. So much so I'm building a dual-processor / dual-core Opteron rig to turn lossless into MP3.


What might be audible to many is the loss of higher-range frequencies / harmonics when compared back to back against lossless. But is that relevant to the portable musical experience, especially when many IEM's seem to muck up those frequency ranges?


+halcyon + gorman + SIE.

 

[wanderman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman 256K MP3 is enough to provide transparency to me in the vast majority of cases. For me, it's the ideal balance between compatibility, quality and battery life. So much so I'm building a dual-processor / dual-core Opteron rig to turn lossless into MP3.

you do know that no current encoders are optimised for dual core. Why does one need such a powerful computer to transcode. You know that you would also benefit from vbr. v1 vbr new is your friend.

if one can't here an audible differnce between lossless and lossy there is no reason to waste space and battery life. I use lossless to archive my music collection and transcode to formats best suited for my portable players.

 

[raisin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by halcyon BTW, it's very easy to proclaim to hear even a dog's fart two million miles away, but doing that when you can't guess or cheat. It's much harder than you could have imagined.

Almost as easy as being a doubting thomas. Maybe the majority can't discern the difference between lossless and lossy, it doesn't mean that some people can't hear a benefit.
The question for me is, Does a portable listening enviornment warrant lossless? Even with the custom IEM's, ambient noise and body movement introduce enough of a noise floor to hide any perceptable (to me) advantages.
Of course, when i've got 80gig's to throw around, it'll be lossless for every song, but present economies dictate this luxury for only a few reference works.

 

[widds2v]

1) sound quality between lossless & high bitrate mp3's is subjective
2) everyones ears are different

I personally with my E5s can tell a minute difference between lossless and lame aps. Since it only happens in maybe 15-20% of my songs, and I only have a 20gb DAP, it's not worth for me to encode in lossless, aps works perfectly fine.

These arguements are going to go on forever. On paper lossless sounds better than mp3, I don't think anyone will deny that, but holding a sheet of paper up to your ears doesn't do anything

Just use whatever sounds best to you!

 

[Oski]

I don't know, even on my home rig it is pretty difficult to tell the difference between 320 AAC and lossless...and that's even when I know I'm switching between one and the other. I don't have much confidence in being able to tell them apart blind. For me, it'd be a waste of disk space and battery life for a portable setup to go lossless.