Which Audio Format Do You Use?

For years I've had all my CD ripped in iTunes at the default bitrate settings. So a mixture of 128 Kbps and 256 kbps (VBR) files.

About 2 years ago I embarked on re-ripping every CD (about 400) we had in lossless via Exact Audio Copy (PC). I played around with settings and could definitely pick up on the varying sound differences between 128,192,256,320, Lossless and the original CD. However the difference between 256 kbps (VBR) AAC / 320 kbps MP3 and the CD are so very very minor it's not worth the space on portable devices imo.

Therefore I have the FLAC Lossless files on the NAS and then change the FLAC to Apple Lossless (bought DB PowerAmp for this) before converting to 256 kbps (VBR) AAC files for iTunes. This last step is still an ongoing process and will take me a bit of time to finish.

Just useful to have the lossless files where space is plentiful and then day-to-day files in much smaller file size.
 
I pretty much stream everything nowadays, apart from my old rave mp3's. Deezer Premium+ allows 320kb streaming anyway so no point in ripping anything anymore.
 
I would pay for music streaming if I had more time to listen to music or you were able to use on mobile data connections (i.e. none of these hideous low data restrictions or high data costs). The quality wouldn't bother me.
 
True.

I pay £12.99 for VF (12-mth SIM only deal; 900mins/500mb/unlim txt) and I'd have to spend more than this to get truly high amounts of data which I just don't think would use massively. Maybe at some point, but it's just not on my radar atm.
 
My contract is £15 a month for unlimited data, that's what I mean. Data is properly unlimited with 3. 600mins voice, 3000mins 3 to 3 voice, 3000 text, unlimited data when roaming to the USA & other countries etc.

12 month sim only :)
 
Derailing the thread, but I saw they do some good deals. I do need the minutes though and suspect I'd be on the £20 deal with unlimited data, plus subscription fees for Spotify, Google Music or whatever on top. My contract is up September so maybe the year I dump VF.

Bit like Netflix et all I'll probably jump one day, but I'm not there just yet.
 
FLAC all the way baby!

I started hearing a difference between 320kbps MP3s and lossless when I was about 17, now I'm 27 and have a good 10 years of professional audio work under my belt and I would go as far as to say its like night and day for me now.

Saying this, I recently out of pure curiosity asked a musician friend of mine if he heard any difference (he's a drummer) and he couldn't!

I had the same song (320kbps) vs FLAC and although it was obvious to me he heard nothing.

crazy eh?

I would also say that at least with FLAC, if your ears do get better, you'll never have to re-rip anything (I had to re-rip my entire collection when I started to hear the difference all those years ago!).
 
I wouldn't expect a drummer to have sensitive hearing :p

You can train your ears to hear certain traits in music that low vs high bitrates will show to be audible but purely depends on the person really as to how audible the difference is.
 
Previously the library on my server was a mess...because I had two separate libraries. One was an old iTunes library with mostly 320Kbps MP3s and AACs, the other a more recent FLAC library. Now moving to mostly ALAC files in an iTunes library, using Home Sharing for the Apple devices and Linn Songbox for everything else. Works brilliantly so far.

As for the difference...personally can hear it. Wouldn't go below 256Kbps or so. Will probably use Google Music for the rest of the lossy stuff, works well.
 
WAV only, mp3 is pure evil, they take so much out of it, i see so many noob DJ's using mp3 192kbs on big systems and it sounds horrible, put a WAV on a Funktion-One and you know what i mean by incredible sound.
 
mp3 certainly is not pure evil.

It was, once... Those times are long gone. It's like saying Windows 64bit is unstable when that era has long passed.
 
Cleisthenes said:
Do think anything is wrong with flac or alac? What makes you choose wav?
Click to expand...

Always used WAV mate, a lot of Dance music sites don't offer flac or alac, so it more of a personal thing with WAV for me, like i said before MP3 is evil to me and will avoid at all costs if i can:)
 
mrk said:
mp3 certainly is not pure evil.

It was, once... Those times are long gone. It's like saying Windows 64bit is unstable when that era has long passed.
Click to expand...

:eek::eek:

I can tell the difference big time using MP3, they take so much out of the original recordings, degrading the overall sound :(
 
Which mp3 encoder? There are so many encoders and so many settings/presets you cannot simply say you can tell the difference without stating the specific encoder used and the specific setting!

I've got (v0) LAME mp3 files with the Flac counterparts and there is minimal to no audible difference depending on what company produced the record. In most cases I opt for Flac because I have the space available on all my devices for now else I'd just stick to v0.
 
Last edited:
All i am saying is that i prefer my music to sound as it is intended to. :)

Hard drive space to hold vast amounts of uncompressed music is cheap as chips now days, so i have no reason to use an inferior product in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Day to day I listen to 320kbps MP3s, on my speaker setup you can't really hear the difference between that and uncompressed, same with on my phone. I can hear the difference on my headphones but it's not night and day between a LAME encoded MP3 and FLAC. Storing terabytes of WAV files is silly though, takes a very short time using EAC to convert to FLAC with no noticeable loss in quality.
 
Spook187 said:
Always used WAV mate, a lot of Dance music sites don't offer flac or alac
Click to expand...

believe it or not, there is software available that will allow you to convert WAV to another lossless codec yourself. :eek:

you'd save at least 40% disk space and have proper metadata support.

i just hope you're not deluded like this guy....

R.O.S.S.I said:
I can tell the difference between flac and WAV trance tracks.
Click to expand...

it's still one of my favourite posts on OcUK. :rolleyes: :D

Janesy B said:
Storing terabytes of WAV files is silly though, takes a very short time using EAC to convert to FLAC with no noticeable loss in quality.
Click to expand...

i'm sure that came out wrong. there is no loss. when decoded, the audio is mathematically identical to the WAV. it's the same principle as compressing other any other files with zip/rar. it would be useless if your files were different to the originals when extracted.
 
It did, they're both uncompressed. Using WAV is stupid, there's no reason to do it.

As for telling the difference between FLAC and WAV... HAHAHAHAHAHA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom