XxxKbps vs Flac

Does anyone hear actually hear a difference between let's say 320kbps and 128kbps.

Other urls found in this thread:

hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,69454.0.html
youtube.com/watch?v=UrfX-g8auc8
rockbox.org/wiki/CodecPerformanceComparison
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

depends on the container.

I like to use Opus .ogg

Way better than anything else for the compression

128 and 320 yes
256 and 320 not really

This is correct, all other answers are wrong.

Nobody can detect a difference between FLAC (or any other lossless codec) and 320kbps MP3. Few (or no) people would be able to tell a file is 256kbps and not 320. 128kbps is noticeable if you're listening on anything other than laptop speakers, YouTube rips are immediately obvious almost regardless of the equipment you're using.

People who use lossless codecs are, end of story, placebo effect retards. Just like in most areas of file storage (and technology, and life in general) you get 90% of the result with 10% of the effort/storage/cost and that last 10% of quality comes with an excessive cost. And, most people can't detect that last 10% anyway.

>gugl music
>20,000
lol

you can sort of tell the difference between 256 and 320 when you listen to very quiet reverb in stuff like lectures or stand up comedy

>And, most people can't detect that last 10% anyway.

That's true. But, to tell them apart it'd basically have to be a side-by-side comparison, and only in really specific circumstances in a recording.

Not that there's much size difference between 256 and 320; storage is cheap these days so it's no big deal to just have everything in 320. But lossless is just plain retarded. 8 megabytes versus like 50+ for a single 3 minute song, when the difference is either imperceptible or there actually is no difference, is stupid.

yes, 320kbps and 128kbps is easily distinguishable. 320kbps and flac is mostly indistinguishable but depends on the music and quality of headphones, however if people think they can tell difference 100% of the time, they're wrong.

Who the hell would seriously consider streaming music if you want quality. It's meant for your parents who bought a 5$ pair of headphones at the airport because they were board.

Lets just say, if you have a decent phone/computer with no obvious interference and you have a 150$ pair of headphones 128kbps is like nails on a chalkboard to me.

nigga what am i supposed to use my 8TB hard drive for if it's not for .flac music?

>People who use lossless codecs are, end of story, placebo effect retards.
I'm going to break it down for y'all niggas:
FLAC
IS
FOR
ARCHIVAL
AND
FUTURE
FORMAT
SHIFTING

Peace.

Hentai and pictures of smug anime girls, duh

I'll allow it.

This. It's not about it sounding better, it's about being able to transcode to other formats at will without churning out shitgarbage. Given how insanely cheap spinning rust storage is becoming there's little argument to make over file size. Why would you NOT get the FLAC?

>listen to some prog album
>gaps between songs
fuck mp3 desu

between 128kbps and 320kbps, absolutely. at-least with music that isn't chiptune or overproduced pop / hip-hop garbage. between 320kbps and lossless, almost never, unless we're talking a perfect live stereo recording of extremely complex music (big jazz or classical compositions and the like).

This, I have a huge library with FLAC, but I allways convert it to v0 to store on my main library, that also has music in other random bitrates, including 320kpbs and unfortunately sometimes 128kpbs

My grandmother with tinnitus and one of those horn shaped things you stick in your ear because you don't like those newfangled electrical hearing aids can tell the difference between a cd burned from 320kbs mp3s and a cd burned from flac.

not mp3's fault, but your player's

If you didn't collect flacs, you wouldn't be able to transcode them into vorbis and opus in the first place.

lossless > all

Take audio of sizzling sounds like something being dropped into boiling oil and encode it at 128k. AAC psycho acoustic model does weird things to my brain. Vorbis and Opus models are more in line with MP3. 64k Opus still isn't in line with 128k MP3 which they claim, but it's pretty good. You should be able to hear the difference between 128k and 320k MP3. You don't need bat ears to notice.

You can hear the difference between flac and mp3 you fucktard.

Now I agree you can't hear a difference if you are not trying to deliberately look for a difference. In order to spot a difference you need a good head set, a good dac, and you need to know what to listen for.

However for passive listening then yes i agree no one will know the difference.

In fact here is a forum thread about people detecting the difference between an mp3 and lossless.

hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,69454.0.html

Hell, I even know a killer sample.

On the Neutral Milk Hotel Album In the Aeroplane Over the Sea on Ghost round 1:01 i remember hearing mp3 artifacts from a trans code off the original flac at even 320 cbr. The bass sounds a tad weird and i can tell it isn't right.

>Sup Forumscore
yeah, you can reliably ABX flac and 320/v0 with material you know really well. this has little to do with the equipment used, though, as long as it's not complete shit

Whats the difference between 192 and 320? I got a 16gb iPhone and trying to store music locally for playing in my car through Bluetooth. Does it make sense use 192 if i need to save space?

>apple
>DRM-free

what

I thnk v0 is the best in terms of size/quality

>320kbps and 128kbps.
if you're referring to mp3 then yes, 128 and 320 is easily distinguishable even without fancy equipment

mp3@128kbps sounds bad.

256kbps can be good depending on the type of content.
if it's just dumbass loud EDM it's fine.

I use vorbis Q5 (which is somewhere around 160kbps) for portable listening on me phone aka most of the total playing time.

Seconded.

I collect almost all my music in FLAC and then I transcode it into 320kbps music. After that I take it on the go. On my PC, I can play Flac, why not?

It is, but it's even more retarded to convert all your music into compressed media.
No point in having your whole music library duplicated when you can just listen from the FLAC file anyway.
I have 70GB I on my phone, no way in hell I'm gonna convert music just so I can save some MB when the phone plays FLAC just fine, and with folder view.

Flac kills battery you tard.

Besides that it is so fucking easy to convert shit.

>Listen 8hours a day and still have 50% battery when I come home.
Oh holy fuck I can't plug the phone on the charger when I come home, what a world what a world.

Your music collection is clearly tiny as a fuck.

It's impossible to put every some on my phone.
My music folder is 2.47TB, and 329GB of it is MP3.

oh I forgot this is Sup Forums, it was stupid of me to assume you don't get off work go to the gym, then go out with friends. You most likely go fuck around on your loonix install and jerk off in a monster girl irc.

How do you live with only listening to about 1% of it?

Did you get F- in math?

8 hours of listening and I have around half battery.
I would need to listen nonstop for 16 hours for it to deplete.
Do you lis... no never mind you're retarded.

How do I live with only listening to 5500~ songs?
I'll live.

youtube.com/watch?v=UrfX-g8auc8
These gooks have a very very hard time telling the difference between 128kbps aac vs lossless with high end equipment, dont think you can with your nigger im50s

read

Here is the difference. I know what to look for where these guys seems like they are a bunch of random bunch who are not autistic enough to know what to listen for.

Secondly I must have listening to ITAOTS about 600 times in the last two years. I know each song like the back of my hand.

>I know what to look for where these guys seems like they are a bunch of random bunch who are not autistic enough to know what to listen for.

Yeah, and I can have sex for over an hour without climax because I've jerked off more than 1000 times

MP3 is slower than AAC because it has inefficient subband + MDCT structure. Avoid it at any cost if your player supports AAC.

rockbox.org/wiki/CodecPerformanceComparison

Well thanks to rotational velocidensity the xxxKbps will lose its quality over time.