[gpkoo]

I only came across this thread today and I've noticed a huge difference between my mp3s and apple lossless on my ipod.

I initially ripped my cds to Flac using EAC and then converted my Flac files to 256kbps VBR mp3s via Foobar.

The apple lossless files were done using itunes with error correction.

I wasn't expecting a significant difference but my mp3s sound a bit boomy and cloudy, with a loss of fine detail in comparison to my lossless files.

Is there something wrong with my conversion in foobar? I did have replaygain engaged for my flac files, could that be causing the problem?

I would love to be able to have my music on my ipod as mp3s rather than ALAC to save space and battery life.

Maybe you could give me some advice on a better way of converting my flac files?

Thanks

 

[EnOYiN]

A difference in volume will let you hear the difference between the files quite clearly. And I hate to recommend you ABX but I think that is still the best method to be sure whether you can actually hear the difference or not.

BTW what version of LAME are you using?

 

[jellybones]

i think there's little to argue. it really comes down to preference. if you can't tell the difference..then what question is left?

 

[blue4n3]

I find a negligable difference between the two. I dont have Martin Logans just yet, so I'l rip my music thats "audiophile quality" in lossless just in case.

That said....you can buy refurb lacie HD for around 100-200 bucks and get 250-500 gb of space. Who cares then? reconvert for all your portable needs.

Here is my question: What music do you import lossless and what do you import lossy? I import hip-hop (usually), trance, techno, and other heavily synthesized music in 224-320 AAC. For Bach, Mozart, Dave Matthews, and other "natural music" I prefer lossless for peace of mind.

What are some tell-tale signs you use to figure that lossless is justified. Some beatles recordings only went up to 400-600kbs, which tells me that the original file was too low-fi to even warrant lossless although it is not synthesized music. I re-rip in 320 and cant hear a difference. Dave matthews, on other had, I can hear a diff in my car with engine off, sitting in the garage, loud enough to hear if from the negbors next day.

 

[blue4n3]

Or is it for recordings with extremely high highs? My Prodigy, fat of the land, cd is synthesized music for the most part and it rips at 1400kbs!!!! I then tried a 192 vs. lossless and in the car showed a big difference at higher voulme. My UM1 did with my ipod 60gb, but just barely with my nokia n95. I named the two version seperately under two albums and shuffled them, so it was random, and I didnt know what I was listening to until I looked at the album name (it read FOTL: lossy and FOTL: lossless)

 

[Manny Calavera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShadowVlican /img/forum/go_quote.gif lots of people can.... .... i am not one of them

Jumps on the train,easily I might add.

 

[Manny Calavera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cid /img/forum/go_quote.gif The internet is serious business! I also fail to see how I'm "silly" if I can tell the difference between FLAC and MP3 what's the problem? Just because you can't doesn't mean me or others should stop using lossless formats and use lossy formats. It's all preference and you're taking it personally like I'm insulting you or something. You prefer MP3, more power to you. I don't.

I agree totally


Quote:

Originally Posted by Altoids /img/forum/go_quote.gif What offends me is the belief that your pitiful human ears could discern any audible difference between a very well-encoded mp3 and a lossless file. You are not a dolphin or blue whale, friend. Take the Pepsi challenge.

You sir,are full of that dark smelly stuff

I can very easily hear the dif between the latest 128 CBR MP3 Codec,and a 320 AAC 48Khz.Taking that Foobar/ ABX test I can go 6/6.Using music from my own vast collection of cd's,its pretty easy.

 

[Gatticus]

You are a freak of nature and not representative of the majority.

 

[immtbiker]

On a quality recording, I can hear the difference in the same song judging between 320kbps and .flac.

Am I a freak of nature, or is my spidey sense kicking in?

 

[ferros]

If flac & mp3 are made from CD, not from 128 mp3's (yeah, i saw guys doing it) then you have a great chance to hear the difference if you do know the song & if you have source that's good enought...
I do feel the difference (sometimes )

 

[gpkoo]

Have decided to try ripping all my songs to Apple Lossless and giving that a go. Could have gone to Rockbox as I have everything in Flac but like the convenience of itunes and I have a number of peripherals which need it.

BTW I was using Lame 3.96

 

[003]

The difference between lossless and 320kbps LAME mp3 is very hard to tell. I can tell, but only on songs I know VERY well. The difference seems to present itself only in soundstage. The 320kbps will have a strange soundstage, it is very hard to tell where vocals or instruments are coming from, sometimes they shift around. But you don't here any real soundstage unless you have a good DAC. Before I got a DAC I would pretend I knew what a soundstage was, but from the analog line out on any sound card, it's extremely hard if not impossible to hear a real soundstage. Once I got a quality DAC, the difference was amazing. I finally understood what was meant by depth, imaging, space, etc... It all sounded so realistic (for a headphone).

 

[Bootleg]

With storage getting so cheap, why risk it?

 

[Bootleg]

I generally rip normal stuff to 320 mp3 using itunes. For critical listening I use Apple Lossless or just play the CD thru my OPPO.

 

[rincewind]

Enough difference to warrant using lossless files and better quality gear.

BTW, this exact thread has been done to death if you use the search.