MP3 vs FLAC

Barzini · 7 Jan 2011 at 17:59

The Halk said:
I don't believe you.

I cannot tell the difference and that's me using Shure SE-535s with custom moulded sleeves from ACS using an Asus Xonar Essence STX. And more importantly that's me trying to hear the difference.

I believe you -think- you can hear the difference, but I don't think you can.

That's cool, I can't prove otherwise to you so it doesnt really matter anyway. I would never twin those excellent headphones with that soundcard btw...

The Halk · 7 Jan 2011 at 18:12

Barzini said:
That's cool, I can't prove otherwise to you so it doesnt really matter anyway. I would never twin those excellent headphones with that soundcard btw...

If there's a better soundcard I'll replace it... I'm not aware of one (but I haven't really looked).

Alexrose1uk · 7 Jan 2011 at 18:32

Halk, probably not a better sound card per se, you'd probably be looking at an external DAC and headphone amp

p0ss3s3d · 7 Jan 2011 at 19:12

If you use studio monitors and a good amp the difference can be quite obvious on some tracks, especially on the cymbals.

At home with active monitors I can't tell a difference between 320/FLAC, I can tell 192/FLAC on most tracks but it's so insignificant I just use 192 for all other purpose aside from recording. Headphones and you start to find it hard to pick 192/flac.

Participant · 7 Jan 2011 at 19:52

marc2003 said:
anyway, the number is all about statistics to rule out the possibility you could be guessing. a bit like tossing a coin, there's a 50/50 chance you'll get it right. it doesn't mean you're psychic when you do get it right. that's why you need to repeat it X amount of times.

Uh yeah, thanks, I get that. It's just that 13 straight times seems random. Why not 50? Or 12?

The comment '13 trials without failure is considered standard', is baseless.

THMRK · 7 Jan 2011 at 20:09

I'm not going to rip out all my flatmates cables and what not and attach my laptop to his stereo just for the sake of a test. I'm sorry, but I just refuse to go to such extreme lengths.

But the differences is noticable given certain circumstances. Most people I know who produce records for bands can tell you that it's important to get very "natural" sounding monitors for studio purposes because if you don't, you might end up with an awesome sounding record that suffers when the super high quality WAV files are compressed down for CDs and what not.

Similarly, if I play an MP3 version of a record and follow it with the CD version using a good stereo, I can hear differences. I'm not saying it's huge stuff. It's certainly not earth shattering, but the music does sound clearer and warmer. The mix sounds better.

Of course you can retain your right to sitting atop your high horse judging everyone who can hear a slight difference as fools. But your test on a laptop or computer speakers is redundant because the medium used from person to person varies on the quality of the gear the test is performed with. So, if one can't hear the difference through head phones via an on board soundcard well, that's to be expected but I'm fairly confident that the difference will be heard on a good hi-fi setup or via studio monitors.

marc2003 · 7 Jan 2011 at 20:11

Robbie G said:
Uh yeah, thanks, I get that. It's just that 13 straight times seems random. Why not 50? Or 12?

The comment '13 trials without failure is considered standard', is baseless.

i must apologise. i had the number 13 in my head but really should have checked before posting. it should be 13 out of 16...

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABX

Since ABX tests typically involve only a single listener performing multiple trials, the number of trials should be kept reasonably small to prevent listener fatigue from affecting the results. 16 trials is generally agreed to provide a good balance, and corresponds with Meilgaard's recommendation for multiple listeners in a duo-trio test, at least as far as minimizing type I errors is concerned. Typically, 0.01 is used as the critical type I error. So that would mean that a difference is concluded to be heard when 13 correct identifications out of 16 is achieved.

anyway, the point is moot. i know no one is going to bother even attempting the test.

Alexrose1uk · 7 Jan 2011 at 21:21

Lol well you've got my numbers. I failed judging by criteria but personally I do feel getting 2/3 approx correct suggests either very lucky guesswork, or that differences were being heard, just not in all sections tested.

Getting 13/16 would suggest you nearly always hear a difference but doesn't cover sometimes hears a difference very well. As an example I find some sounds very sibilent that my mate doesn't yet we both have reasonable hearing with him arguably having better than mine, it doesn't account tor differences in how we each hear things slightly differently.

Barzini · 7 Jan 2011 at 21:34

I use pro gear, not 'audiophile' gear, I have been producing music and mixing down for years so my ears are sensitive to subtle frequencies, my soundcard and monitors cost well in excess of £1000 and believe me I can hear the difference. But whatever, who cares anyway.

Lakeland · 7 Jan 2011 at 21:38

Barzini said:
I use pro gear, not 'audiophile' gear, I have been producing music and mixing down for years so my ears are sensitive to subtle frequencies, my soundcard and monitors cost well in excess of £1000 and believe me I can hear the difference. But whatever, who cares anyway.

The bandwagon cares god dammit

CaptainCrash · 7 Jan 2011 at 23:17

Barzini said:
That's cool, I can't prove otherwise to you so it doesnt really matter anyway.

Yes, you *can* prove it, by doing the ABX test.

But you won't, will you?

marc2003 · 8 Jan 2011 at 10:06

and people wonder why i'm so cynical.

a few of you might think you have genuine excuses for not partaking in the test but surely you must realise by now it does look a little suspicious that not a single ONE of you has stepped forward and proved you're not talking complete and utter codswallop.

Barzini · 8 Jan 2011 at 13:58

marc2003 said:
and people wonder why i'm so cynical.

a few of you might think you have genuine excuses for not partaking in the test but surely you must realise by now it does look a little suspicious that not a single ONE of you has stepped forward and proved you're not talking complete and utter codswallop.

Whats more likely is that nobody really gives a **** enough. I mean, you expect me to download and install some program, prepare 16 MP3s and FLACs of various files, and sit there marking out which one is which just to prove to some no-name on the internet that I can tell the difference between two file formats? LOL. You dont have a clue what you are talking about.

james.miller · 8 Jan 2011 at 14:04

why not? you seem it fit to tell us how much youve spent on your gear. why not show everybody how much difference that expensive gear makes?

When somebody makes a claim, about anything, they should be able to back it up. ABX'ing is not difficult. It seems, predictably, that by large its only people who dont spend thousands on amps and speakers who are the ones willing to be proven wrong.

..but then again they've got less to loose, right?

Whats more likely is that nobody really gives a **** enough. I mean, you expect me to download and install some program, prepare 16 MP3s and FLACs of various files, and sit there marking out which one is which just to prove to some no-name on the internet that I can tell the difference between two file formats? LOL.

You are, of course, of equal status to everybody else on here - somebody who makes a claim he unwilling and unable to prove.

marc2003 · 8 Jan 2011 at 14:31

Barzini said:
Whats more likely is that nobody really gives a **** enough. I mean, you expect me to download and install some program, prepare 16 MP3s and FLACs of various files, and sit there marking out which one is which just to prove to some no-name on the internet that I can tell the difference between two file formats? LOL. You dont have a clue what you are talking about.

one song, 2 files and you repeat the test. cherry pick anything you like. you know, one where the difference is so noticeable it would be impossible to fail.

you've expended far more effort in these last few posts than it would to download and run an installer, clicking next, next, next a few times..

obviously you don't care what i think but if you're not going to do the test then please qualify your statements by saying "i think i can hear a difference....."

CaptainCrash · 8 Jan 2011 at 14:59

Barzini said:
I mean, you expect me to download and install some program, prepare 16 MP3s and FLACs of various files, and sit there marking out which one is which just to prove to some no-name on the internet that I can tell the difference between two file formats? LOL. You dont have a clue what you are talking about.

And, yes, the expected response duly materialises.

How about proving it to yourself? Or do you suspect you won't like the result?

Tefal · 8 Jan 2011 at 15:06

I can tell the difference nearly 100% of the time!

This may be because I have no FLAC tracks

Barzini · 8 Jan 2011 at 15:39

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:11:49

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\asBESTos.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\asBESTos.mp3

15:11:49 : Test started.
15:12:47 : 01/01 50.0%
15:13:32 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:14:33

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\******* Anthem.mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\******* Anthem.flac

15:14:33 : Test started.
15:15:30 : 01/01 50.0%
15:15:42 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:18:31

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Bedbugs.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Bedbugs.mp3

15:18:31 : Test started.
15:18:57 : 01/01 50.0%
15:19:01 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:20:25

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Brutalized.mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Brutalized.flac

15:20:25 : Test started.
15:20:56 : 01/01 50.0%
15:20:58 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:23:20

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\DIE!.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\DIE!.mp3

15:23:20 : Test started.
15:23:39 : 01/01 50.0%
15:23:40 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:24:22

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\F.U.B.A.R..mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\F.U.B.A.R..flac

15:24:22 : Test started.
15:24:32 : 01/01 50.0%
15:24:33 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:25:49

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\First Blood.mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\First Blood.flac

15:25:49 : Test started.
15:26:12 : 01/01 50.0%
15:26:13 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:27:30

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Hey Now.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Hey Now.mp3

15:27:30 : Test started.
15:27:42 : 01/01 50.0%
15:27:43 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:28:19

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Pit.mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Pit.flac

15:28:19 : Test started.
15:28:34 : 01/01 50.0%
15:28:35 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:29:34

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Serpent's Bite.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Serpent's Bite.mp3

15:29:34 : Test started.
15:29:56 : 01/01 50.0%
15:29:57 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Set It.mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Set It.flac

15:30:49 : Test started.
15:31:06 : 01/01 50.0%
15:31:07 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:32:21

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Sorcerer of Death's Construction.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Sorcerer of Death's Construction.mp3

15:32:21 : Test started.
15:32:33 : 01/01 50.0%
15:32:35 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:30:49

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:33:09

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\The Human Traffic King (White Slavery Pt. 2).mp3
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\The Human Traffic King (White Slavery Pt. 2).flac

15:33:09 : Test started.
15:33:25 : 01/01 50.0%
15:33:26 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.1
2011/01/08 15:34:10

File A: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\Thin Line Between Love & Hate.flac
File B: C:\My Music\Foobar Rips\MP3\Thin Line Between Love & Hate.mp3

15:34:10 : Test started.
15:34:25 : 01/01 50.0%
15:34:26 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 1/1 (50.0%)

Barzini · 8 Jan 2011 at 15:40

Thats the same CD, ripped once to FLAC, and then again with LAME to 320kbps, all correctly identified without errors. It was actually a fun test and some were easier to tell than others.

Nitefly · 8 Jan 2011 at 15:45

I can't tell the difference, I imagine that the quality of your speakers and / or sound card are probably bigger factors in sound quality.