[bassophile]

Exactly as the title says!!

 

[DemonicLemming]

What do you define as a "really good" DAC?  $300?  $1000?  $3000?

 

[Denys]

320kbps ?
 
Max $320
 
It's no use to spend money on a good DAC when your primary source (the music) is shi....
 
Goes too for the headphones...
 
Denys
 

 

[bassophile]

Denys, on a blind test 320kbps vs. lossless (every other piece of equipment/environment is constant) how many times out of 10 can you identify the lossless?
 
Not attacking you, just curious...

 

[Xymordos]

I'm using the D100 and m-Stage. Its actually really hard to tell the difference between mp3 and lossless...You'll have to concentrate very hard on the music to tell subtle differences...

 

[129207]

Quote:

320kbps ?
 
Max $320
 
It's no use to spend money on a good DAC when your primary source (the music) is shi....
 
Goes too for the headphones...
 
Denys
 

Oh boy here we go again. Please don't post if all you're doing is contaminating a thread with nonsense. There are more constructive ways to up your postcount. 
 

 

[wind016]

Quote:

320kbps ?
 
Max $320
 
It's no use to spend money on a good DAC when your primary source (the music) is shi....
 
Goes too for the headphones...
 
Denys
 

I'm using a $1300 DAC and I can barely tell the difference between FLAC, WAV, and 320 kbps mp3. The difference it small enough that I don't bother to give a dam and rip everything into mp3. Saves space and allows easier playback on MP3 players. I wouldn't bother doing a blind test. You hear more differences from everyday changes in hearing than 320kbps vs. lossless.
 
But the difference between my $200 DAC vs. my $1300 DAC is huge. There were certain details that I can not hear with the cheaper DACs. Soundstage is also much smaller.

 

[deadlylover]

Quote:

320kbps ?
 
Max $320
 
It's no use to spend money on a good DAC when your primary source (the music) is shi....
 
Goes too for the headphones...
 
Denys
 

 
Aahhaah I use the $2400 O2mk2 with Youtube quality music, which like 100kbs or so??
It's most certainly not a waste at all.
 
I also have heaps of trouble telling the difference between 320 (or 160 for that matter) mp3 to lossless, I failed miserably during blind testing ^^.
To be honest, I have a hard time telling difference between DAC's, so I've given up on them =P. I'm using the Audio-gd dac19mksomething and I would certainly not bet my left nut on being able to differentiate it against my computer sound card in a blind test, but that's just me.
 
Might as well give it a try eh? It's not like the source material will be holding you back anyway.

 

[olor1n]

Quote:

Denys, on a blind test 320kbps vs. lossless (every other piece of equipment/environment is constant) how many times out of 10 can you identify the lossless?
 
Not attacking you, just curious...

You've derailed your own thread. The question you need to ask is if your 320kbps mp3s will sound better from a quality dac, compared to onboard sound (if that's your current setup). You'll probably find the answer to be a resounding yes, but at what price point you draw the line is another matter.
 

 

[TwoEars]

What a mess....
 
The big question of course what you're using today.... start by telling us that and we can try to hint at how big a difference there would be.

 

[Denys]

Oh ! Boy !!
 
Didn't mean to offend anyone here.....sorry guys...
 
Unfortunately, I do find a difference between MP3 music and Apple Lossless/FLAC music.... Happened to me downloading music from Itunes and then buy the original CD because I loved the album... Well beleive me, the difference in sound was noticeable.....
 
I find you get fatigue (feel the music is agressive to your ears) a lot faster with compressed music
 
I still don't believe you should spend a lot on a DAC if you listen to compressed music.....a used DacMagic should me more than enough IMHO...
 
Once again, sorry, I should have used different words...
 
Denys

 

[limpidglitch]

Quote:

 
Aahhaah I use the $2400 O2mk2 with Youtube quality music, which like 100kbs or so??
It's most certainly not a waste at all.
 
I also have heaps of trouble telling the difference between 320 (or 160 for that matter) mp3 to lossless, I failed miserably during blind testing ^^.
To be honest, I have a hard time telling difference between DAC's, so I've given up on them =P. I'm using the Audio-gd dac19mksomething and I would certainly not bet my left nut on being able to differentiate it against my computer sound card in a blind test, but that's just me.
 
Might as well give it a try eh? It's not like the source material will be holding you back anyway.

I'm with you here.
Several years have passed, yet I've found no reason for moving past my Pico and 320AAC/mp3.

 

[Willakan]

A decently encoded 320kbps mp3 will be in 99% of cases perceptually indistinguishable from lossless. It is my understanding that it is possible to engineer or locate files that are distinguishable, but this is not something you are going to hear readily even in these miniscule minority cases (it's the sort of thing that requires listening to 3 second cymbal reverb trails on loop at considerably higher than normal listening volume.)
 
Feel free to spend as much on a DAC as you want (although I would advise caution as to spending huge sums of money on systems that appear to have no measurable advantages over their cheaper counterparts)

 

[Buyer no 1]

To me the obvious answer is yes

  It is really not a question of whether you can tell the difference between 320 kps mp3 and loseless, or not. It's a question of whether you will get better SQ with a better DAC, using 320 kpbs mp3 as source files. And I think you would. Of course a some point you have to decide if the money is spent better elsewhere. But that is the big question no matter what part your'e upgrading.

 

[zenemano]

but why use 320 when you can use V0? 

(smaller files, plus it can encode up to 335kbps or so depending on the source, unlike it's shown in the chart above)