mp3 (320) or FLAC for UE Triple Fi 10

[janruzinsky]

Hi guys,

I am thinking ofthen in the last days. Is FLAC coding so much better than mp3 320 coding? I am using the triple fi and the iAUDIO 7 and I do not hear a relevant difference between these two codings... There is a small difference in the overall perception of the music but the difference is to small to force me to code all my mp3 to FLAC.

What do the experienced of you think about this..

 

[jinx20001]

i use lossless whenever i can,i dunno why, im sure my ears wont be able to tell if i use a good quality bit rate

 

[Tokoza]

mp3 to flac?

 

[jinx20001]

yeh ofcourse you cant upgrade mp3's you will have to re-rip cd's

 

[janruzinsky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokoza /img/forum/go_quote.gif mp3 to flac?

I am speaking about recoding my CD`s to FLAC again. I know that it would be unefficient to code mp3`s to FLAC.

 

[milkpowder]

I'm no sure what you mean by "inefficient to code mp3s to FLAC", but I'm guessing you know that the resulting FLACs will sound exactly the same as the mp3 from which they were converted.

I use another lossless format (ALAC/Apple Lossless) and like jinx20001, I use it despite knowing that 99% of the time, the difference is too minuscule to impede on my enjoyment (which is all that matters IMO). I get a certain (false?) sense of security when using lossless formats, that the source files are not ever going to be the weakest link in the chain. As long as you can afford to use it, then why not?

 

[janruzinsky]

I understand completly that I have to rerip my cd`s to FLAC.
The question is if it is worth the huge difference between the sizes of mp3 (320) and FLAC.
C`mon guys I want to have as much oppinions as possible.

 

[GlorytheWiz825]

I honestly cannot tell the difference between FLAC and MP3 encoded at 320 kbps. If you can't tell the difference either, don't bother wasting time converting your entire library.

 

[chouman]

It takes a lot of time to convert lots of music to lossless. I'll echo and say if you can't tell the difference, then don't worry about it. But if you'd like to have a lossless copy of your music to play off your computer with future upgrades, maybe start ripping in lossless.

 

[janruzinsky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlorytheWiz825 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I honestly cannot tell the difference between FLAC and MP3 encoded at 320 kbps. If you can't tell the difference either, don't bother wasting time converting your entire library.

Fuuuh, so my ears are not ill??

 

[manaox2]

I would say its important to have a hard drive backing up your cds in lossless somewhere, making a large capacity external hard drive is good and cheap at a little over $100 nowadays for about 500gb. Thats a great investment if you value your music. I think that if you have trouble fitting all your music onto your portable player, 320 kbps is fine. One day, if you get that high quality portable amp/dac combo, you'll come home to your full collection in perfect condition on your PC and you'll still have all your tunes on the go in mp3. It seems that very few people should have actual reason to complain about 320 kbps encoding on today's portable player.

I stick to lossless whenever possible, but I suppose thats why I have only 2gb left on my 80gb iMod.

I'll probably clean it up again soon though.

 

[Tokoza]

I can hear a slight difference between mp3 (320) and FLAC with certain music, when I listen to my Trekstor Vibez 12Gb (hd) and Super fi 5 pro. Certainly the difference should be greater with Triple Fi 10 pro because these are more transparent phones. But I am not sure if this difference is noticeable if you plan to listen to music in noisy environment, or if there is other noises that can influence (microphony from cables etc.) Another aspect you maybe should consider is that the battery time might be shorter when you use FLAC.

 

[janruzinsky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokoza /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can hear a slight difference between mp3 (320) and FLAC with certain music, when I listen to my Trekstor Vibez 12Gb (hd) and Super fi 5 pro. Certainly the difference should be greater with Triple Fi 10 pro because these are more transparent phones. But I am not sure if this difference is noticeable if you plan to listen to music in noisy environment, or if there is other noises that can influence (microphony from cables etc.) Another aspect you maybe should consider is that the battery time might be shorter when you use FLAC.

Battery life should not be affected on a flash player using flac.
Actually I do not miss anything using the triple fi with 320 mp3`s.
All the specific details of the instruments and the soundstage seems unaffected.

 

[Caribou679]

When I encode in Flac the size of a normal cd is around 325-375mb. I do not encode in mp3 but instead I encode in ogg level 8, which is about 256kbs, and the file size is around 100-150 mb.

On a mp3 player like the Cowon D2 I use a SDHC card of 8gb and these differences in size make me consider to use the ogg forrmat.

On my Cowon U2 of 1 gb, I even encode in ogg level 2 ,96kbs,for about 25-35mb.

I prefer to have more music at my disposition than to have to "unload-load" new music on the player.

Also , I like very much the sound that ogg encoding gives compared to file size. I am sure some prefer mp3 encoding.

regards,

 

[Computerstud]

Flac, Lossless, 320kps, 192kps all sound the same to my ears.

However, some may be able to see the difference.

Do an experiment. Although this is a novel idea around head-fi but humor me with my recommendation.
-Blindtest the different formats. See if you can tell the difference and if you can pick which is which.

There was a great link imtbiker posted about some blindtesting and the guy broke down in tears. Don't know where the link is but do a search if you are interested.