[greeniguana00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatticus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, we all hear quite differently. Ten years ago a I tested my hearing with a tone test cd and couldn't hear anything above 17khz. Now it's probably even worse.

This is what I would expect. The higher the frequency, the quieter it will sound to you. High freuqencies are hard to produce, don't travel very far thorugh air, and are hard to hear. I would blame the speakers and the air between them and you before you blame your ears. The high frequencies just have less power in them by the time they reach your ears than the low frequencies.

First post here, BTW.

 

[ShadowVlican]

EnOYiN, thanks for taking the time to explain what you did.... seems nothing is wrong with the way you approached your ABX test

you certainly have great ears, wish i can say the same for myself

 

[EnOYiN]

I am convinced allready. I should store my mp3s in FLAC. (I did a lot more ABX testing - I am not going to post them here again - ever) But for me it's clear that I can actually hear the difference and I can afford a new harddrive.

Ears are something which grow on your head when you get older. I had nothing to do with it.

 

[Redo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnOYiN /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am convinced allready. I should store my mp3s in FLAC. (I did a lot more ABX testing - I am not going to post them here again - ever) But for me it's clear that I can actually hear the difference and I can afford a new harddrive. Ears are something which grow on your head when you get older. I had nothing to do with it.

Good ears then!!!

I'm going to ABX my version of Stairway to Heaven flac vs -v 0 sometime later, see how I pan out

. I did some prelimary results and got 3/3, but as I well know, I could end up going 3/15

 

[EnOYiN]

I was able to hear it best in the first few seconds of the track. The dry sound of the mp3 I mean. I think about a better word for "dry sound". There should be a better way of explaining that.

 

[Redo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnOYiN /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was able to hear it best in the first few seconds of the track. The dry sound of the mp3 I mean. I think about a better word for "dry sound". There should be a better way of explaining that.

Yes, the acoustic guitar solo at the beginning. Suprisingly, it's a good test track for hearing the effects of compression. I specifically listened for the "dry sound" you called it, and it's a pretty accurate description. Almost as if the dynamic range isn't all there, and the energy and punch of the music is slightly gone. A bit less 3d sounding you could say. But the difference is definatly there.

 

[SiBurning]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif I used to think the same thing. I would come across a song that sounded terrible while my player was on shuffle, look at the display, and find that it was 128kbps, rather than one of my then-current -V 2 MP3s, which averaged around 192kbps. "A ha," thought I, "I can clearly hear the difference between 128kbps and ~192kbps." It turned out, however, that I just had some 128kbps MP3s that were encoded using a very old encoder.

Good point. I thought of another today. the DAC might not be as good with mp3 as with flac. I don't know.

I'll give the mp3 encoding a few more tries.

One thing, though... How does this hold up with a decent player? I think the iRiver H140 sucks. I only use it for the digital feed. Flac through the iRiver sounds worse than an mp3 fed through the dac.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiBurning /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good point. I thought of another today. the DAC might not be as good with mp3 as with flac.

In the iriver and most modern players, the DAC doesn't decode the compressed audio. Both the MP3 and the FLAC are decoded to uncompressed PCM before being fed to the DAC.

 

[Altoids]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cid /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can, well I think I can. Either way, I'm archiving so for now and the future it's best to have an exact copy. There will come a time when it will be much easier to tell the difference and I'll laugh at you all who encoded in lossy formats.

Silly boy (or girl), they aren't mutually exclusive. Used properly, one would archive their WAVs in a lossless format making them easier to store on, say, DVDs or an external hard drive, then either rip simultaneously in a lossy format or transcode later for DAP use.

Perfectionists aside, no one should bother wasting hard drive space in their DAP on lossless files. Even if you can tell the difference in an optimal environment, odds are a well encoded ogg or mp3 would be completely transparent outdoors, in the subway, or any of the other situations where DAPs are specifically engineered toward. And the best part is that you already have your lossless archives whenever some new, shiny lossy formats pops up for you to mess with.

 

[EnOYiN]

I was conviced by this thread to actually store my music files as FLACs. I think it isn't worth the loss of data just for a few more MB. Harddrives are kinda cheap these days and will get cheaper every year.

Btw please don't call people silly for whatever reason.

 

[Altoids]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnOYiN /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was conviced by this thread to actually store my music files as FLACs. I think it isn't worth the loss of data just for a few more MB. Harddrives are kinda cheap these days and will get cheaper every year. Btw please don't call people silly for whatever reason.

I call'em like I see'em.

 

[Cid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Altoids /img/forum/go_quote.gif I call'em like I see'em.

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.

 

[slwiser]

I was not satisfied with 128 AAC in my Shuffle. But a higher bit rate sounds very good though. So I use MP3s at extreme VB. These are anywhere between 196k and 256k as I have noticed.

 

[EnOYiN]

I still use mp3 on my Zen Micro. And I listen to it with a px200. This way I can walk the street without people looking at me.

 

[Altoids]

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.

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.