No real difference between flac and 320kbps mp3?
- Thread starter Radiation
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 608
Why would anybody want to rip FLAC at 24/96
CD's are 16 bit so you cant add data.
They get recorded in the studio at those rates and then get rendered down to the 16bit 41khz for CD.
I have to agree people that think they can hear a difference between 320kbps and WAV are kidding themselves.
Unless of course its at night when the power going to their hifi is cleaner.
CD's are 16 bit so you cant add data.
They get recorded in the studio at those rates and then get rendered down to the 16bit 41khz for CD.
I have to agree people that think they can hear a difference between 320kbps and WAV are kidding themselves.
Unless of course its at night when the power going to their hifi is cleaner.
There shouldn't be any difference at all. FLAC and WMA Lossless are both lossless. Just one's open source, and one's proprietary.All my music's ripped to both 192k mp3 (for iPod and to sync with Laptops) and WMA lossless (for home use) at the same time. The reason for WMA over FLAC is that it works perfectly with Windows Media Center.
Soldato
Why would anybody want to rip FLAC at 24/96
CD's are 16 bit so you cant add data.
They get recorded in the studio at those rates and then get rendered down to the 16bit 41khz for CD.
I have to agree people that think they can hear a difference between 320kbps and WAV are kidding themselves.
Unless of course its at night when the power going to their hifi is cleaner.
People are not ripping cd's at that rate - you can buy music mastered at 24/96 - as i mentioned above : http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx
Pretty poor selection...to say the least!
Soldato
Depends what you are in too - its what is on the Linn label obv!
You can get hi-res music from other places, have to ask my mate where from as like i say as Sonos cant play it im not all that bothered about it yet!
You can get hi-res music from other places, have to ask my mate where from as like i say as Sonos cant play it im not all that bothered about it yet!
Soldato
I would suggest this is still a huge waste of energy/power - re-encoding every time you transfer? It may well be quicker than the USB write, but you are still repeating the job you did however long ago
I can see the benefit undoubtedly - and its fully dependant on how many times you change over the tracks for the mp3/car I guess
As stated its not really the cd's that are the issue - I could easily do a 2tb "live" disc and the same again for the backup - its the BR's that are the space hogs
a waste of energy lol, i doubt that very much ?
Soldato
Well actually there is some good stuff on there..... and they just won label of the year........ want was you expecting from a independent UK label, the same as Sony !!!
You can also look to naim and B&W for 24 bit downloads, that are of coarse NOT recorded at 16 bit !!!
Why am I finding this thread more and more annoying.... to many people with an opinion and little knowledge or experience.... but willing to post and lambaste those that have.
Quite why some wasted 1500 quid on a system when clearly they would have been happy with 250 quid one baffles me !!!!.... OH forgot the "
"Why am I finding this thread more and more annoying.... to many people with an opinion and little knowledge or experience.... but willing to post and lambaste those that have.
Quite why some wasted 1500 quid on a system when clearly they would have been happy with 250 quid one baffles me !!!!.... OH forgot the "
Indeed, I agree, I think some of Mr_Sukebe's comments and opinions have been rather unfairly ...lambasted to say the least. He tries to add to the thread with his experiences and he gets shot down as if he's a scientist at the seminary.
Last edited:
I certainly don't consider them lesser genres (of music)...it was said simply to state the fact that they basically only cater for those who want to listen to jazz or classical...
I have a SACD rip at 24/96 of Dark Side of the Moon in stereo and I must say it sounds awesome, vocals are so clear and smooth, sound stage is so nice and wide and the seperation is just unreal.
How did you rip an sacd? I got the imoression that it was very difficult. ref being lambasted, well it's not uncommon on forums. The good news is that it's fairly easy to spot the difference between someone who's geuinely interested, and thus worth spending time on, and those who are here purely to pick an argument for the hell of it. Where possible, i'll just avoid the latter.
Soldato
Far as I know you can't rip a SACD, only the 16/44.1 layer. DVD-A you can with a lot of faffing, as I have done on the one I have.... Fleetwood Mac Rumours.
Oh my experience, over 25 years going from basic Nad amp to top end Linn.......and I frequently post
Oh my experience, over 25 years going from basic Nad amp to top end Linn.......and I frequently post
Soldato
I seem to recall preparing a CD for people here to try and discern between PCM and various bitrate MP3s and the outcome being that well encoded MP3 is pretty much undetectable, especially at reasonable bitrates.
I guess if you dont take the time to convert to MP3 properly then it sounds naff, but no matter how high end I go with anything I personally cannot discern a difference. I have a graph of my hearing somewhere so I know I'm not deaf too
I guess if you dont take the time to convert to MP3 properly then it sounds naff, but no matter how high end I go with anything I personally cannot discern a difference. I have a graph of my hearing somewhere so I know I'm not deaf too
Soldato
I seem to recall preparing a CD for people here to try and discern between PCM and various bitrate MP3s and the outcome being that well encoded MP3 is pretty much undetectable, especially at reasonable bitrates.
I guess if you dont take the time to convert to MP3 properly then it sounds naff, but no matter how high end I go with anything I personally cannot discern a difference. I have a graph of my hearing somewhere so I know I'm not deaf too
I couldn't agree more, it's people like Mr Sukebe who i don't understand. There's of course going to be a discernible difference between poor bit-rate rips and quality 320/v0 rips, it's when people start trying to tell me they can hear a difference between things after that. It's even more annoying when they describe the differences to be "better low end control", having more "air" and that they're more "natural"... What? Because 320 rips sound unnatural and have less "air"?
I guess it's because I've not spend a ludicrous amount of money on a power cable that I'm unable to hear the difference?
I'm also not here just to pick an argument, I'm genuinely interested in the subject but it just astounds me that you still spout this rubbish on here.
Last edited:
You need to spend some time reading audiophile equipment reviews and articles to start to understand what is meant by the various terminology used I think, having said that ...a lot of it is a fairly logical use of descriptive words really.
I know exactly what he is trying to say about the sound by the words he has used to describe it, and I used to think I knew what it meant, but I must confess that I didn't really understand it until I had heard such things for myself, and then I realised what was meant by 'air' and 'natural'. It's not just a sound either, it's the feeling of atmosphere that you get from a certain presentation of audio. Which might sound like bs too, but it's not, not to me anyway. I didn't really, truly 'get it' until I started to listen to highend equipment and then you have to get the synergy right too. You can do it with headphones much, much cheaper though ...that's the easiest way to get such a listening experience.
If you really don't understand it, and your ears are working as they should ...it's possibly because you haven't heard it.
I know exactly what he is trying to say about the sound by the words he has used to describe it, and I used to think I knew what it meant, but I must confess that I didn't really understand it until I had heard such things for myself, and then I realised what was meant by 'air' and 'natural'. It's not just a sound either, it's the feeling of atmosphere that you get from a certain presentation of audio. Which might sound like bs too, but it's not, not to me anyway. I didn't really, truly 'get it' until I started to listen to highend equipment and then you have to get the synergy right too. You can do it with headphones much, much cheaper though ...that's the easiest way to get such a listening experience.
If you really don't understand it, and your ears are working as they should ...it's possibly because you haven't heard it.
Last edited:
So are you following your own advice and ripping all your audio to 64kb
I watch films and BR's much more than I listen to music or the dvd's - which is why they are the priority on my streamer, with a 5090 display it would be pointless to neuter the quality of the rips from br