Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | ||
Shot.By.His.Own.Son 
Forum Newbie 
Joined: July 12 2009 Status: Offline Points: 14 |
 Topic: Loseless vs Lossy?Posted: July 14 2009 at 21:13 |
|
|
Is it really worth having my songs in lossless format? Is the sound really much better or is it just a waste of space?
|
||
|
||
 |
||
|
explodingjosh
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: February 10 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 507 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 21:32 |
|
|
Depends on what you're playing the tracks with. If you're playing on a small 16 bit mp3 player with little ear buds, then Lossless is a waste of space.
If you're playing on a big, wide, 24 bit stereo system with top of the line equipment, then, there will be a difference. Beware though, most "audiophile" equipment is extremely over priced and the expected performance is advertised using pseudoscience. Edited by explodingjosh - July 14 2009 at 21:34 |
||
|
||
|
||
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005 Location: NE Indiana Status: Offline Points: 28057 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 21:47 |
|
|
Vs. Flossy.
THOSE WHO DONT UNDERSTAND HAVE AN INDIE/ASIAN-SHAPED HOLE IN THEIR HEARTS Edited by stonebeard - July 14 2009 at 21:48 |
||
|
||
|
Evan
Forum Groupie 
Joined: April 13 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 98 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 21:52 |
|
|
If space isn't an issue, go with lossless. If your short on space, try getting at least your favourite albums in lossless. With a good speaker system, and especially on decent headphones, you can tell the difference. It shows most clearly on certain sounds - acoustic guitar passages, cymbol crashes - but all and all there is a marked increase in quality. Granted, just because a lossless file will have 10 times the bit rate of a lossy mp3 doesn't mean it will sound 10 times better - the difference is of course marginal.
Also, remember that the #1 factor in quality is always what occurs upstream. A poorly produced or engineered album will never sound pristine. Conversely, very well produced albums (Crime of the Century, Aja) sound great even when compressed. Lossless files are the same quality as CDs. Ever thought your CDs sounded better than your digital downloads? Go with lossless. Can't tell the difference? Many people can't, and if thats the case you may be perfectly happy with mp3s, especially those 192kpbs and up. However, i believe there is to some extent a placebo effect here - just having files in lossless makes you think they sound better. Another bonus to lossless files is that you can convert them around to other formats and burn the to CDs with no decrease in quality. Messing around with mp3s is like making a photocopy of a photocopy. |
||
|
||
|
cobb2
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 25 2007 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 415 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 22:38 |
|
|
If you are asking this, then you can't tell the difference, by listening?
If this is the case what diff does it make. All I would be asking is- do you have the resources to hold them all as lossless. If not opt for 320kbs mp3. also- this will get moved shortly
|
||
|
||
|
Shot.By.His.Own.Son
Forum Newbie
Joined: July 12 2009 Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 23:44 |
|
|
Yeah I realized after I posted it that it was in the wrong spot, and I have yet to listen to a lossless track so I have no idea how they sound.
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Evan
Forum Groupie
Joined: April 13 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 98 |
Posted: July 14 2009 at 23:53 |
|
Have you listened to an album on a purchased CD? If so, you've essentially listened to a lossless track. Try ripping a CD you know well to an mp3 file and play it alongside the CD and see if you can tell the difference in a blind test. |
||
|
||
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005 Location: NE Indiana Status: Offline Points: 28057 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 00:32 |
|
|
There doesn't seem to be a point in going lossless if you can get a 320 kbps mp3 of the song, so long as you don't have somewhat high end equipment. But if you're thinking of lossless vs. 120 kbps songs and nothing in between, uh, hell yeah go for it. But go for FLAC for sure. Nothing plays APE files holy crap they're almost useless.
|
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 01:21 |
|
|
http://www.heise.de/ct/Der-c-t-Leser-Hoertest-MP3-gegen-CD--/artikel/124391
They used high end gear (B&W Nautilus 803, Marantz CD14, Marantz PM14, Straightwire-Pro cables, sonically perfect room), but still most contestants (many of them audio professionals) could not tell the original (CD) apart from 256kbps MP3. My recommendation: Go for MP3 instead of lossless ... but only at a discount. The MP3 should cost significantly less than the full CD. You can get reasonably priced MP3s at eMusic.com and Amazon.com, for example. |
||
|
||
|
Mr ProgFreak
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2008 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 5195 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 01:24 |
|
That would not really be a blind test, since you would still know which is which. One possible solution: Have a friend burn you a CD which contains the same track in two versions - one ripped from CD and then burned to CD from the ripped WAV, the other one ripped from CD, converted to high bitrate MP3 (with a good codec) and then burned to CD again. Then you listen to the two tracks and try to tell which is which ... |
||
|
||
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam Joined: April 29 2006 Location: Atlantais Status: Offline Points: 29630 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 07:15 |
|
|
Actually, the CD itself is not really a lossless format. Of course for those who like LPs better, because they sound "warmer", the LP isn't really a lossless format since there's the whole needle noise and scratches thing. Basically all recorded music is an artificial reproduction anyway. When it comes to ripping of CDs for using in a digital player, I go with WMA 64K for space conservation purposes. Recognizing that I'll most like be listening in an environment where there will be extraneous noises anyway, you'll never get perfection. When I do want to sit down and concentrate on the music, I'll play the CD using a nice set of headphones.
Edited by Slartibartfast - July 15 2009 at 20:37 |
||
|
||
|
Henry Plainview
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 26 2008 Location: Declined Status: Offline Points: 16715 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 16:32 |
|
|
I can't tell the difference.
However, a word of warning on MP3s, I have shied away from them as late because you can't always be guaranteed of a good rip and I've had a couple of terrible albums.
|
||
|
if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
||
|
||
|
J-Man
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 07 2008 Location: Philadelphia,PA Status: Offline Points: 7826 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 18:21 |
|
|
Unless you REALLY care about the slightest bit of a difference, it doesn't matter. I don't care either way.
|
||
|
||
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 16 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Status: Offline Points: 31169 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 19:09 |
|
What is being discussed is lossless vs. lossy compression. The CD tracks are the source - their fidelity to the original music with metrics such as SNR or sampling rate is another discussion. |
||
|
||
|
A Person
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 10 2008 Location: __ Status: Offline Points: 65760 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 19:34 |
|
|
I have been wondering how much better 320 kbps is then 256 kbps, because my Pink Floyd file is taking up my undersized mp3 player ( only 8 gigs, and less than 700 songs)
|
||
|
||
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: February 16 2006 Location: Pennsylvania Status: Offline Points: 31169 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 19:52 |
|
I would say very, very marginal at best, I'd be surprised if most people could detect a difference. Everyone should be ripping to VBR, by the way |
||
|
||
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam Joined: April 29 2006 Location: Atlantais Status: Offline Points: 29630 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 20:04 |
|
My point was that if you're already losing bits of the music when it's put into CD form, that you really shouldn't worry too much about even more at ripping lower lossy bit rates when you make a digital music file from a CD. I'd recommend getting a friend to help you with an experiment. Take a track you know well, rip it lossless and at various other bit rates and do a blind hearing test. See how low you can go before the track really starts to sound like it's missing something, then go with the next higher setting. Edited by Slartibartfast - July 15 2009 at 20:39 |
||
|
||
|
A Person
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 10 2008 Location: __ Status: Offline Points: 65760 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 20:07 |
|
|
I am about to do a cd/320/256 side by side comparison with "one of these days" to see how big of a difference they make. I am using a $20 pair of Sony headphones, so they're not perfect, I don't know how big a difference they will make.
Edit: I don't notice any degradation, if there is it doesn't detract from the music. Edited by A Person - July 15 2009 at 20:27 |
||
|
||
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam Joined: April 29 2006 Location: Atlantais Status: Offline Points: 29630 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 20:41 |
|
|
^^^^Here's someone to listen to. He's 18 and hasn't made to that point in his 20's where most people lose the ability to hear certain frequencies. Now take it into a store and try out some higher end audio equipment for us.
 Edited by Slartibartfast - July 15 2009 at 20:43 |
||
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
||
|
||
|
Shot.By.His.Own.Son
Forum Newbie
Joined: July 12 2009 Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Posted: July 15 2009 at 21:50 |
|
Through my Research I have heard that after 256 kbps the difference is not noticable at all and if it is existant its very marginal.
Edited by Shot.By.His.Own.Son - July 15 2009 at 21:50 |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Loseless vs Lossy?
Topic Options
Shot.By.His.Own.Son wrote: