[Earwax]

Please answer only if you have listened to good quality Lame MP3 encodes and compared them to the original CD (or a lossless copy) played on the same rig.

[ good quality, for purposes of this poll, is defined as --alt-preset extreme or --alt-preset insane with lame 3.9x ]

Again, only "good" MP3s count, don't bother voting if you've only listened to 128k Blade or Xing encodes.

 

[Earwax]

If you can hear a difference between "good" MP3s and the original CD, I'd like to know what type of system/headphone you have.

And, another question for the "Golden Ears" group -- what type of flaws do you hear in MP3s?

 

[Earwax]

Myself, I can't hear a difference. That's with a Sony D-5 CDP and MDR-V6 headphones. I compared the original CD to a CDR burnt from the decompressed MP3s.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

I can hear a difference, and it doesn't bother me, so I am usually pretty happing using my Archos, but for my "home" system I prefer full-quality lossless files, since after all I didn't buy all this audio gear to listen to a fraction of a real CD.

 

[aphex944]

On my old setup(Diamond MX300 soundcard + Grado SR-60s), I couldn't tell a difference between a CD and "extreme" LAME MP3. With my new setup however(Sonica USB + Amp + Beyer DT 880s), I can easily tell the difference now. Very surprising, since I was always fed that equipment did not make a large difference in the perception of artifacting when I used to frequent HydrogenAudio.

 

[Music Fanatic]

There is not enough resolution on this poll. I can hear a difference from the original CD, and it does bother me, but I still find them acceptable for some situations.

I'm redoing everything with FLAC, though.

 

[Earwax]

Quote:

Originally posted by Music Fanatic There is not enough resolution on this poll. I can hear a difference from the original CD, and it does bother me, but I still find them acceptable for some situations.

Yeah, I agree. I thought of that option earlier, then forgot to put it in when I made the post.

 

[Earwax]

Any more votes?

 

[grinch]

i hear a very small difference sometimes, but it's pretty small.

to me, the mp3s sound a little softer. the hits of notes don't seem as firm or hard, and the dynamics are compressed somewhat so the extension just isn't quite the same. this difference is very slight though.

this is using my computer as a transport into my cary 306/200 cd player's coaxial input, kgss, and then omega 2 headphones. i've compared them to flac files and/or a cd using the cary's normal transport. of course, this probably isn't the most scientific way to do "tests," but i'm not conducting an experiment, nor am i submitting this to some kind of higher authority. this has just been my experience. i usually use standard as i find the size easier to swallow, and the difference on my albums is very small from extreme, in my experience anyway. plus, most of the time i'm encoding mp3s for my ipod so there's no need to get too crazy and take up space and battery time.

 

[Polygon]

I can't hear a difference and neither can anyone else I know. I have my entire music collection encoded in APX. I can hear a difference between the original CD and APS though.

Then again, I have my ripping set-up just right for my hardware configuration. It can differ depending on the ripper used and what your settings and hardware are.

 

[stereth]

I can hear a difference. They still sound good. I have a couple dozen rock and metal albums on my hard drive as --alt-preset insane. Cymbals aren't as clear or extended as they should be, and some sharp transients are smudged. It reminds me of looking at a jpg up close - when you have black lines on white, for example, you can see some gray on each side of the line.

Next year, though, I'm going lossless.

 

[chadbang]

It all depends on with what and how you listen to the mp3s. If your using grados or senns and out of your computer's soundcard or a portable, they will sound fine. Good enough. But I recently did a test of different encoders using my home system (and it's not a $25,000 system, it's around a $2,000 sytem) and there's really no comparison of mp3 to the cd. The cds sound fuller, rounder and richer. The mp3 sound thin. The natural soundstage - both in width and depth - falls apart when you encode with mp3. My speaker (Spicas) are known for their ability to present a realistic soundstage and they make this aspect of mp3 encoding clear. But for portable use, I don't really mind using mp3s. In fact, although I decided LAME was the better encoder during my test, I've encoded all my cds with iTunes' Fraunhofer codec just because it encodes about 20 times faster on a Mac than LAME on my work computer - I decided I didn't want to waste a whole day to encode 3 cds when I had 20 gigs worth of space to fill up on my iPod! So I wound up using an mp3 codec lesser than the best because, IMO, it's still completely fine for portable or computer listening.

 

[lan]

I prefer Musepack at the higher bitrates. The transients and higher frequencies are better to me.

If I have no point of reference, such an MP3 is fine to me. Using AKG K1000, a loss in soundstage isn't monumental so it's liveable.

There's nothing like APE/FLAC though. The ambience just gets lossed with lossy compression.

 

[fewtch]

These days I'm using FLAC on my hard drive (AP 24/96 ->Headsave Ultra -> HD600), but will still use "--alt-preset standard" for portable usage.

I no longer see the point in dealing with even the most minor (potential) artifacts with a large hard drive available, although I occasionally listen to an assortment of older MP3s with a mix of different encoders and settings (some sound crappy, some sound OK, some sound pretty darn good). MP3 is plenty listenable to my ears with Lame and the --alt-presets, but what's the point unless it's necessary? The only reasons to use lossy encoding that I can think of are (A) save space, or (B) save bandwidth.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally posted by fewtch I no longer see the point in dealing with even the most minor (potential) artifacts with a large hard drive available, although I occasionally listen to an assortment of older MP3s with a mix of different encoders and settings (some sound crappy, some sound OK, some sound pretty darn good). MP3 is plenty listenable to my ears with Lame and the --alt-presets, but what's the point unless it's necessary?

Definitely, especially when you can get HD space for $0.50/GB or less.