I did a test recently using automation to flip between the two as they played and couldn't hear any difference using a pair of sennheiser HD600 headphones, i looked at a spectrum analyzer and theres no ambient noise in the quiet areas with the mp3 at higher frequencys but the sound content looked the same as the flac, so im thinking at this level you can't go wrong with mp3 for quality and file size?
No real difference between flac and 320kbps mp3?
- Thread starter Radiation
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 11,589
- Location
- Bucks
^^this
+1.
Personally I believe I can hear a difference on my system, so only use FLAC. Still, I don't exactly use budget level components.
One additional thought though. Took me months to rip all of my CD collection to FLAC, and space is now bonkers cheap (at least for home systems). Why bother ripping to MP3 if you "might" have a really good system at a later date that it's possible to tell the difference with?
Linked to the above, it's very easy to run a mass conversion of FLAC to MP3 and as storage is cheap, I've ended up with all of collection in FLAC, then mass converted so that's also in MP3 for use on the move.
I really really struggle to understand why people don't make the initial rip to FLAC.
Personally I think I can hear a difference, however I wouldn't state that categorically and then do a blind test ...but I believe I can at least. I agree with Mr Sukebe though, storage is cheap ...why not use FLAC. I've spent many, many hours ripping my entire cd collection to FLAC ...actually I have about 30 still to do.
As above though, I don't exactly use kit you will find in Richersounds either so your mileage may vary.
As above though, I don't exactly use kit you will find in Richersounds either so your mileage may vary.
What he said.
One that i'm now kicking myself over.
I only ever used to use digital music for on the move through my iphone and due to back ground noise and never really concentrating i never thought i'd rip to anything above 192k. Since if i ever listened at home i'd generally stick the cd on.
Now i've bought myself a Squeezebox Touch i'm kicking myself at having to re-rip about 600 cd's into FLAC
Recently I played a track without really paying attention to it specially, through speakers while using the PC. After a while I said to myself "this is the mp3" and sure enough it was, then comparing to the wav file I had of it, the artefacts I was hearing were no longer present. It was a 320kbps mp3.
You need to know what to listen for, but to me I find the real giveaway is the transients, the attack of a cymbal or hi-hat for instance, but also evidenced in vocal sibilance, it sounds glitchy, slow, on mp3 for me. Depends greatly on the material though and it can take a while in a track for me to hear the giveaway artefact.
Might as well rip to FLAC either way, space is indeed cheap
You need to know what to listen for, but to me I find the real giveaway is the transients, the attack of a cymbal or hi-hat for instance, but also evidenced in vocal sibilance, it sounds glitchy, slow, on mp3 for me. Depends greatly on the material though and it can take a while in a track for me to hear the giveaway artefact.
Might as well rip to FLAC either way, space is indeed cheap
the problem Im having (apart from 700+ albums, so could easily hit 800GB with double /triple albums) is BR rips taking over cd storage (as it were), or nearly 2 TB incl backups - and thats before you have a mobile version of each track/album (and backup of that too if one is to do it properly)
So without really trying I could be over 18-20TB of digital storage (without even starting on my dvd's)
When one is at that level, (without having multiple devices all over the house, and remembering which device has what content) - its getting one badass nas or equiv to hold 10 drives or more (given hdd are "still" at 2TB max).
This is where "storage" isnt as cheap as some are talking about (its a bit naive imo to not incl the cost of the device when talking about cost of storage)
back on track though - I have to re-rip all my cd's at some point and will be using Flac originally
So without really trying I could be over 18-20TB of digital storage (without even starting on my dvd's)
When one is at that level, (without having multiple devices all over the house, and remembering which device has what content) - its getting one badass nas or equiv to hold 10 drives or more (given hdd are "still" at 2TB max).
This is where "storage" isnt as cheap as some are talking about (its a bit naive imo to not incl the cost of the device when talking about cost of storage)
back on track though - I have to re-rip all my cd's at some point and will be using Flac originally
People who make absolute statements like that and brand other groups who may not agree with them as deluded are pretty deluded to be fair. Audio is incredibly subjective, well all know this.
I know what you mean FrankJH, but relatively speaking, for the amount of data you are storing ...hard drives is still the cheapest way to do it, it's that or don't store it really. I double up on all of my storage, as I have a backup of everything, which as you say does start to get expensive after a point, I do it anyway though ....it's cheaper than the alternatives and I'd rather do it than lose what I have. Then again I'm in the order of 6-8TB not 18-20TB ...I don't digitise Blue Rays though, I only have a few and I'm happy to leave them as disks as they are just too much to store on my server really.
Music specifically is around 700GB of my storage in FLAC's aswell, which of course I backup so dobule that then.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say I have hugely "brilliant" systems - at home, it's a PC & Asus Xonar DX, hooked up to a Yamaha DSP-AX757SE receiver, and B&W speakers - 602.5s, 600s and LCR60. In the car, it's a PC with on-board sound, and some German amps/component speakers.
HOWEVER, I can often tell the difference between music I've ripped to MP3 (and, historically, Vorbis) between 192-320kbps, and the stuff I've had the chance to re-rip to FLAC.
The comments above of "no one can tell anything over 192kbps" is just rubbish - some people obviously can tell the difference. If you can't - great for you - you don't need to worry about storage space!
HOWEVER, I can often tell the difference between music I've ripped to MP3 (and, historically, Vorbis) between 192-320kbps, and the stuff I've had the chance to re-rip to FLAC.
The comments above of "no one can tell anything over 192kbps" is just rubbish - some people obviously can tell the difference. If you can't - great for you - you don't need to worry about storage space!
Totally agree with this, I ripped all my CD's as a poor student too MP3 and last year finally gave in and did the lot again, I wouldn't necessarily say FLAC is the only option just make sure it is lossless as converting bettween formats is always going to be less hastle than starting from scratch!
Correct me if I'm wrong;
But .mp3s also deteriorate each time they are moved from one storage device to another? Is that correct?
Or is the term lossless derived from not clipping frequencies..
Regardless.. I find that my flacs can maintain clarity when I turn up my Bose 5.1s to max. Whereas can here slight distortion on the treble and low bass when using 320kbps.. I've been playing and studying music for 9 years.. generally surrounded by it everyday. So maybe I'm more subceptible. Or just paranoid.
But .mp3s also deteriorate each time they are moved from one storage device to another? Is that correct?
Or is the term lossless derived from not clipping frequencies..
Regardless.. I find that my flacs can maintain clarity when I turn up my Bose 5.1s to max. Whereas can here slight distortion on the treble and low bass when using 320kbps.. I've been playing and studying music for 9 years.. generally surrounded by it everyday. So maybe I'm more subceptible. Or just paranoid.
But then again, aren't you the guy who said he could actually hear a difference in quality when using a different power cable?
I've got what I'd consider to be an upper-mid range system consisting of B&W 683's and a Nad C325BEE. Thats nearly a grand and a halfs worth of gear, so id class that as a system where it's 'possible' to tell the difference. Yet i cannot hear even a minute bit of difference between 320kb/s rips and FLAC. Moreso, the fact that if you compare the waveforms of 320 and FLAC you will find no difference furthers the point... That FLAC is a waste of time and space.
You seem to be the master of the placebo effect mate, ever since I saw your argument about power cables (as long as they're not total tripe) making a marked improvement to sound quality, I can't take anything you post seriously!
No. MP3s are stored in digital form, they don't degrade with time or movement. You could send them to the moon and back and it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.
The term lossless means the original signal can be reconstructed perfectly, like a .zip file. You wouldn't want to zip a word document only to find half the letters garbled when it was unzipped.
mp3 is lossy because it works on the assumption that not all the information is actually required, so some is lost during encoding. This is ok though, as most people can't tell the difference between a well encoded mp3 and FLAC or CD. But there is a difference.
Ok, so they cut out the frequencies that humans can't hear? Is that the idea? Therefore discarding data to reduce filesize? Also, when I code from a cd to a mp3. Am I just writing binary to the HDD? Like, what's the most basic language used when writing mp3's. Never did enjoy reading about the history of programming. But that's a question I never got answered.. Noise is read from 0's and 1's? Don't laugh at me.. please. ha.
S
S
It's read off the disk as 0s and 1s and it's stored as the same on your computer. That's what your DAC is for, converting the digital signal into an analogue waveform when you want to actually hear those 0s and 1s.
I think you need to go read up on a basic understanding of computers. All information stored on your computer is binary.
It's not as simple as just discarding data either. It's a complex algorithm.
You don't need to understand programming to understand that an MP3 is a file format.
I'd recommend you go read some articles on this stuff. Please don't ask where, just use google.