What audio format do you use?

[AustinKZombie]

So I just switched over my music library to .flac and I love it,(one dumb reason is cause bigger files but ya) i think the audio does sound better when using my headphones .

So with format do you use, if one of the choices isn't in the pole comment it below.

[flibberdipper]

The highest bitrate MP3 of the file I can find (up to 320KB/s).

[nosirrah123]

I get the best format I can, but I don't get too worried about it. A well encoded mp3 can sound pretty darn similar to a flac. (Unfortunately a lot of mp3s are terrible)

[Coconut Money Affiliates]

I use whatever the song downloaded as, because audio "Lossless" is total bullshit and I could care less. Also, I hear no difference from FLAC to WAV to MP3 with my DT990's. 

[EmoRarity]

I use whatever the song downloaded as, because audio "Lossless" is total bullshit and I could care less. Also, I hear no difference from FLAC to WAV to MP3 with my DT990's. 

Which is normal because machines hardly make out a difference, and humans are not machines, more so when the machine cost more then the human is worth. 

[Uber Hamburgler]

Usually 256-320 kbps AAC (.m4a, .mp4 or .aac) or 320 kbps MP3.  If I'm going to use it for a project that I am going to distribute, I will use 256 kbps Vorbis (.ogg) since it has an open source license.

 

I dabbled in FLAC and WMA Lossless CD rips for a while, but I started to realize that it would take a complete setup of top notch audio gear to really notice a difference, if I ever would at all.  Then there is the issue that CD audio is not lossless to begin with even if it isn't compressed; it is reduced to 16 bit resolution at a 44.1 kHz sample rate from the 24 bit resolution and 96 or 192 kHz sample rate it was originally recorded with in the studio.  It just isn't worth needing to store multiple copies of songs for playing on my phone, tablet, friends' computers, etc; and needing to receive physical CDs so that I can make sure that it isn't just transcoded from an MP3 by the somewhat sketchy sites that provide FLAC downloads.

[ejm_110]

FLAC.

 

I use Sennheiser mm30i (mobile) and HD448. At first, it was just to give it a try. I really did switch every time. I here the differences, but not on all songs I have. I though it was just placebo . After some time, my ear adjusted then I tried mp3(256-320) after listening FLAC for 3mos, I cannot go back anymore. When I use my HT audio to listen to my library, it is heaven for me. What I like is that I can hear the crispness of leads and solos, even the cymbals.

 

TL;DR FLAC. Thought it was "bullshit", "placebo" and the like, I was wrong. Everybody has different ears.

[Lyons]

Everything mp3 @ 320. Converting FLAC to mp3 to put on my phone every time I get something new is a pain in the ass so I just keep my entire library as mp3. Having a smaller library size also means I can store it on my SSD which is only 128gb (laptop) rather than store it externally all the time. ~900 songs is less than 8gb.

[NannerBeans]

FLAC and WAV

[BoredErica]

I use FLAC and mp3.

[SSL]

I still own CDs.

[ShearMe]

I'm in an "open relationship" with my music.

[Lays]

I listen to whatever sounds the best, even if it's mp3, flac, etc.

[ShearMe]

I listen to whatever sounds the best, even if it's mp3, flac, etc.

 

Mason - "You Are Not Alone" arguably sounds better at lower resolutions and on crappy old onboard sound. Now THAT'S good mastering.

[Lays]

Mason - "You Are Not Alone" arguably sounds better at lower resolutions and on crappy old onboard sound. Now THAT'S good mastering.

 

i love a good mastering

[EmoRarity]

 arguably sounds better at lower resolutions and on crappy old onboard sound. Now THAT'S good mastering.

What you saying about my song tho. 

[Ech0location]

CD's most of the time, although when I do digital it's in FLAC or WAV. Portable setup uses ALAC out of an iPhone 4 with an awesome anime case

[ShearMe]

What you saying about my song tho. 

 

That it is so good that it sounds great pretty much no matter what almost.

[creatip123]

Good mastering is the biggest factor of a good audio file. OP, try this: find a good sounding FLAC file you have, convert it to MP3 320kbps. If you're using Foobar, it can convert formats on the fly. Just right click on a song on the playing playlist, and choose convert. You might need an encoding *.dll for that particular format, though, but it's easily downloadable on the net for free. 

 

Convert it, and try comparing the FLAC to the MP3 320kbps. If you can't hear any differences, then you could convert and store your FLAC files in MP3 format, and save up to 9/10 storage space. If you're one of few people that can hear a difference, then yeah, keep using FLAC for best results.

[Verne]

99% of music I listen to comes through Spotify (subscription for 320kbps quality, of course). The 1% that doesn't come from Spotify is either FLAC (mostly game soundtracks) or AAC320kbps (which I also used back when my music came in physical round format, for iPod and iPhone compatibility).

[benbenkr]

DSD these days, otherwise FLAC wherever possible. MP3 (V0 320k) only on a portable device, for compatibility sake.

[Stefky]

My collection is in FLAC with bits and pieces of MP3 320CBR.

 

In all honesty I have DBT myself and do believe it is impossible to tell MP3 320CBR which has been encoded with a decent, error-correcting modern ripping programme like EAC and FLAC. In all my years I have never encountered anyone who can prove they can DBT them.

 

But if I am building a collection I want it to be perfect and so use FLAC for the sake of idealogical perfection.

 

I am perfectly happy listening to Spotify at 320 as well.

[creatip123]

My collection is in FLAC with bits and pieces of MP3 320CBR.

 

In all honesty I have DBT myself and do believe it is impossible to tell MP3 320CBR which has been encoded with a decent, error-correcting modern ripping programme like EAC and FLAC. In all my years I have never encountered anyone who can prove they can DBT them.

 

But if I am building a collection I want it to be perfect and so use FLAC for the sake of idealogical perfection.

 

I am perfectly happy listening to Spotify at 320 as well.

 

For perfection, FLACs are soooo old skool. DSD is the way to go nowadays....

 

*nah, I'm just messing with you. A good mastered DSD is a pure bliss, yeah. Listened to the re-mastered 'Thriller' in DSD, played through AK240, using fitear IEM, and it was quite orgasmic. But with 500MB-1Gig per file, it's just too much for me....

[Stefky]

For perfection, FLACs are soooo old skool. DSD is the way to go nowadays....

 

*nah, I'm just messing with you. A good mastered DSD is a pure bliss, yeah. Listened to the re-mastered 'Thriller' in DSD, played through AK240, using fitear IEM, and it was quite orgasmic. But with 500MB-1Gig per file, it's just too much for me....

 

A lot of this stuff is psycho-acoustics you know. Any remainder is the use of better masters with higher res releases to fool people into thinking the format is better.

 

What speakers or headphones you use will make a huge difference, quality of the actual production and mastering of the music makes a huge difference, quality components will make an audible but subtle difference, quality of the file? Yes it makes an audible difference when we are comparing 192kbps to 320kbps CBR - beyond that point I have never been presented with definitive proof that anyone can DBT the difference.

 

I use FLAC largely for idealogical reasons. I want a perfect copy for my perfectly organised consistent file and file naming structure, perfectly consistent tagging system, 1080x1080 album arts. My music collection has become an OCD pursuit for me and FLAC is just a part of that.

 

Does it sound any different from good, error-corrected 320kbp CBR? Pretty sure it doesn't, no.

[creatip123]

A lot of this stuff is psycho-acoustics you know. Any remainder is the use of better masters with higher res releases to fool people into thinking the format is better.

 

What speakers or headphones you use will make a huge difference, quality of the actual production and mastering of the music makes a huge difference, quality components will make an audible but subtle difference, quality of the file? Yes it makes an audible difference when we are comparing 192kbps to 320kbps CBR - beyond that point I have never been presented with definitive proof that anyone can DBT the difference.

 

I use FLAC largely for idealogical reasons. I want a perfect copy for my perfectly organised consistent file and file naming structure, perfectly consistent tagging system, 1080x1080 album arts. My music collection has become an OCD pursuit for me and FLAC is just a part of that.

 

Does it sound any different from good, error-corrected 320kbp CBR? Pretty sure it doesn't, no.

 

Yeah, that's why I said I was messing with you. The DSD was played with top notch media player (the AK240), listened with high-end Fitear IEM. Lots of loose variables for the bliss I was talking about. Could've been the DSD format itself, or maybe it was the player, or more likely the IEM. Could've been the combination of them all, I don't know. The hardwares were borrowed, so I couldn't spend more time testing/comparing the variables one by one. I'm just going with the solution that realistically works for me, which is FLAC or 320kbps MP3, with E10 + HE400, as of yet...