[ubermang]

I just wanted to ask people who play lossless files on their portable players. I know this can bring up another huge/useless debate but I was so curious and had to ask.
Some people say they can actually hear the difference between MP3 files and lossless files. I want to ask them "what difference" they hear. I can not tell any slight difference between lossless files and MP3 V0 or 320kbps on my portable setups(iMod 4G with Headsix and iAudio x5 with Headsix). Heck, I can't even tell any difference when I compare them on my desktop setup(laptop, USB DAC, Gilmore Lite, HD600).
Why play lossless and drain the battery when you can enjoy the same(or almost the same

) sound by playing MP3s or other high quality lossy files?
Do you REALLY hear better sound with lossless files in your portables?

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermang /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you REALLY hear better sound with lossless files in your portables?

I don't even kid myself that I do, even with my ER-4S. On my main computer setup with a good DAC, yes, it makes a difference, but with my iPod, not really.

 

[mahatma andi]

For me it's just psychologie.

On my Ipod I have the space to have my whole collection (which is quite small at the time) in apple lossless. And when-ever i don't like the quality of the music, i can be sure that it isn't caused by the bitrate but it's a bad mastering or just not my taste... just to be sure and have one source less for bad quality in my rig.

mahatma

 

[Dougboy]

Not just on portable devices. Given a good DAC on even a home rig, can you really hear the difference between lossless and 320?

 

[UseName]

I think there may be a lot to do with the source file. Even lossless isn't always truly lossless. By that I mean it is compressed when pressed on a CD.

Many CD's are compressed so much that they have less than 10dB of dynamic range, and even some engineers have gone so far as to allow digital clipping into the CD itself in order to get more 'loudness'. So further compressing these files is likely to have a negitive and audible impact.

 

[FrederikS|TPU]

Even on a medium quality home rig you can hear the difference between lossless and lossy MP3. Of course it depends on how the MP3s are encoded. With the right presets MP3s @ 320 kbps sound almost as good as FLAC. Some artifacts are still noticeable however, but only when you listen in order to uncover them. For me it is a convenience thing. I don't want to convert all of my CD backups to MP3 for use on my portable player.

If the CDs you are listening too are bad mastered you can't really hear the difference in my opinion because the sound is smeared and corrupt to begin with.

BTW: found this guide which I think have been mentioned a lot of times on Head-fi before Artifact Training Page

Cheers!

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dougboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not just on portable devices. Given a good DAC on even a home rig, can you really hear the difference between lossless and 320?

Many will claim yes but in reality very, very few can do this. Use lossless on your player because you 'don't want to have to worry about it'? Err, OK. Use lossless on your player because you don't want to maintain both an archival copy and a compressed copy? OK I guess, if you're really that short of space on your home PC. But use lossless on your player because you can actually hear a difference between that and high-bitrate compressed? Not likely.

 

[tjumper78]

v0 and flac both sound the same to me no matter what kind of set-up i use. using flac on portable players is overkill imo.
however, imod users with high-end amps might disagree.

 

[dgbiker1]

I can only hear the difference up to 320kbps, any higher than that and it all sounds the same.

 

[krmathis]

I really don't know, and probably don't think,I would hear a difference between well encoded lossy files and lossless files. I just choose lossless for two simple reasons:
1. Easy to keep just one version of the file. Don't need both lossless and lossless files in my library.
2. No need to worry if the files are transparent or not.

 

[faichiu]

From my experience, Iaudio product does not have huge different between mp3 and lossless. I try U3, X5, and D2.

The teclast T39 I had has huge different between mp3 and flac.
M6SL also has a huge different between mp3 and Wav.


Quote:

Originally Posted by ubermang /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just wanted to ask people who play lossless files on their portable players. I know this can bring up another huge/useless debate but I was so curious and had to ask. Some people say they can actually hear the difference between MP3 files and lossless files. I want to ask them "what difference" they hear. I can not tell any slight difference between lossless files and MP3 V0 or 320kbps on my portable setups(iMod 4G with Headsix and iAudio x5 with Headsix). Heck, I can't even tell any difference when I compare them on my desktop setup(laptop, USB DAC, Gilmore Lite, HD600). Why play lossless and drain the battery when you can enjoy the same(or almost the same ) sound by playing MP3s or other high quality lossy files? Do you REALLY hear better sound with lossless files in your portables?

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif I really don't know, and probably don't think,I would hear a difference between well encoded lossy files and lossless files. I just choose lossless for two simple reasons: 1. Easy to keep just one version of the file. Don't need both lossless and lossless files in my library. 2. No need to worry if the files are transparent or not.

And if you have sufficient storage capacity on your player and aren't looking for maximum battery life then that tactic makes some sense. And I would add that those who do want to maximize available space and battery life on their player shouldn't be concerned with any audible difference between well-encoded compressed files and lossless.

 

[NiceCans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by UseName /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think there may be a lot to do with the source file. Even lossless isn't always truly lossless. By that I mean it is compressed when pressed on a CD. Many CD's are compressed so much that they have less than 10dB of dynamic range, and even some engineers have gone so far as to allow digital clipping into the CD itself in order to get more 'loudness'. So further compressing these files is likely to have a negitive and audible impact.

Isn't this a different type of compression?

 

[ILikeMusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceCans /img/forum/go_quote.gif Isn't this a different type of compression?

Yes, you are correct, lossy file compression and dynamic range compression are two totally different things.

 

[UseName]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceCans /img/forum/go_quote.gif Isn't this a different type of compression?

Yes, indeed it is. But if your source is already jamming instruments together, when you compress if further, the end result is much worse. If you are already limiting the dynamic range, then compressing it to mp3, you further destroy much of the nuances. You start to lose the resonance of the guitars, or violins, bass drums don't have the same impact, and you theoretically have a flatter sound.

Some argue that this actually makes better sounding mp3's but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. A lot of this is my own speculation, but it makes sense to me that if you have a bad source, your copies will be worse.