Experiences with 128kbps vs 320kbps?

[-TesseracT-]

 

 

I can tell the different between 128 and 320, 320 and Flac(usually around 900) and then PCM(1400) the difference between FLAC and PCM is a lot less noticeable than 128 vs 320 but its there.

That's impossible, it has got to be a placebo effect. Audio encoded in FLAC retains 100% of the 0's and 1's that the PCM originally contained. There is no difference in audio quality.

[skywake]

Less than 128kbps I can't stand, 128-196kbps I'll put up with, 256kbps+ is good enough, 320kbps+ I can't tell the difference.

[Markmjb]

Well, at least you implicitly realise that above 320kbs it doesn't matter at all.

"Back in the day" when I was still downloading music, a higher bitrate just meant that you had more chance of a good quality copy of the song.

There were a few a'holes who manually upped their bitrate to make their version look good when it actually wasn't , but most of the time above sentence still applied.

Despite that enhanced placebo effect, I can definitely hear the difference, but it's very dependable on the song: with some shitty pop songs, there is no difference.

[jalex3]

I can hear the difference. It  depends on the type of music how much it bothers me.

 I have loads of space so even if all music music was FLAC it wouldn't mater. 

[Clarkey]

That's impossible, it has got to be a placebo effect. Audio encoded in FLAC retains 100% of the 0's and 1's that the PCM originally contained. There is no difference in audio quality.

Maybe, i am comparing tracks that i ripped myself in PCM to FLACs someone else ripped( i havent got around to getting the FLAC encoder for foobar yet) so maybe it has something to do with how the other person encoded it.

[Clarkey]

Less than 128kbps I can't stand, 128-196kbps I'll put up with, 256kbps+ is good enough, 320kbps+ I can't tell the difference.

Then you have sub standard audio gear Or you are listening to music that doesnt really benefit. For above 320 kbps electronica really doesnt benefit all that much but Metal benefits hugely.

[skywake]

Then you have sub standard audio gear Or you are listening to music that doesnt really benefit. For above 320 kbps electronica really doesnt benefit all that much but Metal benefits hugely.

To be fair you've already argued that you can hear lossless compression so I don't think your opinion holds much weight. Anyways, thread wasn't about the nonsense debate of FLAC vs 320kbps it was about 128kbps vs 320kbps. Clearly there's a difference there so lets leave it at that. Also I listen to a wide range of stuff from Blues and Dream Pop to Shoegaze, Math Rock and Psychedelia. If I don't have music that benefits then I don't know what's left to benefit from it.

 

but if you want to turn the thread into 320kbps vs lossless? By all means.

[SSL]

but if you want to turn the thread into 320kbps vs lossless? By all means.

 

Let's, because that discussion has never happened before.

[.spider.]

File A: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line.flac

File B: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line v3.mp3

176kbit/s average

 

18:32:04 : Test started.

18:32:19 : 01/01  50.0%

18:32:42 : 02/02  25.0%

18:33:19 : 03/03  12.5%

18:34:01 : 03/04  31.3%

18:34:37 : 04/05  18.8%

18:35:02 : 05/06  10.9%

18:35:07 : Test finished.

 

 ---------- 

Total: 5/6 (10.9%)[

 

 

File A: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line.flac

File B: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line v2.mp3

193kbit/s average

 

18:36:08 : Test started.

18:37:07 : 01/01  50.0%

18:37:24 : 02/02  25.0%

18:38:09 : 02/03  50.0%

18:39:07 : 03/04  31.3%

18:39:51 : 04/05  18.8%

18:40:46 : 04/06  34.4%

18:40:51 : Test finished.

 

 ---------- 

Total: 4/6 (34.4%)

 

File A: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line.flac

File B: S:\Music\flac\[1997] Ultra\10. The Bottom Line v1.mp3

227kbit/s average

 

18:41:55 : Test started.

18:42:11 : 00/01  100.0%

18:42:31 : 00/02  100.0%

18:42:55 : 00/03  100.0%

18:44:18 : 00/04  100.0%

18:44:42 : 00/05  100.0%

18:45:20 : 00/06  100.0%

18:45:24 : Test finished.

 

 ---------- 

Total: 0/6 (100.0%)

 

Its save to say that lame 3.99 is getting transparent for me somewhere above 190kbit/s and below 230kbit/s (average bit rate), at least for this randomly chosen song. 

[BoredErica]

This is dumb.

I can't even be bothered to be annoyed.

[.spider.]

This is dumb.

Why?

[Clarkey]

To be fair you've already argued that you can hear lossless compression so I don't think your opinion holds much weight. Anyways, thread wasn't about the nonsense debate of FLAC vs 320kbps it was about 128kbps vs 320kbps. Clearly there's a difference there so lets leave it at that. Also I listen to a wide range of stuff from Blues and Dream Pop to Shoegaze, Math Rock and Psychedelia. If I don't have music that benefits then I don't know what's left to benefit from it.

 

but if you want to turn the thread into 320kbps vs lossless? By all means.

 

It is a nonsense debate as Lossless is no doubt better. It just comes down to an argument of quality vs Storage. If you can hear the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps then theres a difference to be heard from 320 to 800+. You are just a moron if you claim otherwise..

Also i just responded to you already starting something. You cant just make a statement off topic then when someone calls you out on it say "OH YOU ARE STARTING AN ARGUMENT".

 

Fuck you, you either a troll or stupid.

[.spider.]

If you can hear the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps then theres a difference to be heard from 320 to 800+. You are just a moron if you claim otherwise..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(data_compression)

[s4spencer]

256+ is all you will ever need unless you're professionally listening to and/or grading listening equipment, to the point of getting headaches from excessive concentration.

 

I prefer to keep flac simply to have the full quality available to me, it usually gets downgraded whenever I put it on something with limited space

 

 

Personally I find with a decent pair of speakers that 128 doesn't sound "bad", but, without being able to pick out anything specific, 320 definitely just seems to sound nicer.

[Clarkey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_(data_compression)

Cool. I still know i can tell the difference. As i use 320 on my phone and higher on my computer my library is filled with doubles. Now i can tell the difference when it switched from 320kbps to higher and vice versa. It may be another form of the tube vs solid state argument as the FLAC just sounds different and is perceived to be better. But it seems in mine and many others opinion FLAC>MP3, and as the people arguing for MP3 say they cant tell the difference surely its better just on a scope of sounding better to more people:)

[.spider.]

Now i can tell the difference when it switched from 320kbps to higher and vice versa.

How do you know that this isn't a placebo effect?

[SSL]

This is dumb.

I can't even be bothered to be annoyed.

 

It's not even entertaining at this point.

[Clarkey]

How do you know that this isn't a placebo effect?

Because im not looking at my media player, i notice a difference in sound quality look and its because im listening to 320kbps.

[Pomfinator]

If you have decent equipment, and a non-noisy environment, I think most people can tell the difference between 128k and FLAC/320k.  I mean hell, I don't proclaim to have Golden Ears but...

 

foo_abx 1.3.4 report

foobar2000 v1.3.5

2014/12/03 21:58:55

 

File A: D:\Music Archive\[ASL] LiSA - Sword Art Online OP - crossing field [FLAC] [w Scans]\01 crossing field.flac

File B: C:\Users\Justin\Desktop\01 crossing field.ogg

 

21:58:55 : Test started.

22:00:33 : 01/01  50.0%

22:01:00 : 02/02  25.0%

22:01:25 : 03/03  12.5%

22:01:57 : 04/04  6.3%

22:02:27 : 05/05  3.1%

22:03:16 : 05/06  10.9%

22:03:41 : 06/07  6.3%

22:04:02 : 07/08  3.5%

22:04:17 : 08/09  2.0%

22:05:21 : 09/10  1.1%

22:06:21 : Test finished.

 

 ---------- 

Total: 9/10 (1.1%)

 

Even I got the 9/10 required to verify that I wasn't gussing between 128k Vorbis and FLAC.  I would even go so as far to say my hearing is pretty bad.

[skywake]

It is a nonsense debate as Lossless is no doubt better. It just comes down to an argument of quality vs Storage. If you can hear the difference between 128kbps and 320kbps then theres a difference to be heard from 320 to 800+. You are just a moron if you claim otherwise..

Again, by all means. Go ahead. I'm not stopping you

 

 

Also i just responded to you already starting something. You cant just make a statement off topic then when someone calls you out on it say "OH YOU ARE STARTING AN ARGUMENT".

 

Fuck you, you either a troll or stupid.

I just made a statement in response to the thread topic and where the conversation had already headed. Because of your comment before mine. If you want to turn it into an argument by hurling abuse? Well then that's your choice. I don't particularly care about the topic and I wasn't trying to start anything. I just find it amusing that you got so worked up over it so quickly.

[Clarkey]

Again, by all means. Go ahead. I'm not stopping you

 

I just made a statement in response to the thread topic and where the conversation had already headed. Because of your comment before mine. If you want to turn it into an argument by hurling abuse? Well then that's your choice. I don't particularly care about the topic and I wasn't trying to start anything. I just find it amusing that you got so worked up over it so quickly.

Im not worked up You throw in a couple swear words and 14  year olds always have a bitch fit. 

[skywake]

Im not worked up You throw in a couple swear words and 14  year olds always have a bitch fit. 

So I'm a stupid, moronic 14 year old troll bitch who should fuck off? Because I said 320kbps was good enough? DING! DING! DING! Congratulations, you've just reaffirmed the belief that audiophiles are dicks. You've won a "people are going to avoid trying to help people in this subforum" award.

 

This is why nobody likes you audio subforum. Seriously guys, collectively you all need to grow up.

[Lays]

So I'm a stupid, moronic 14 year old troll bitch who should fuck off? Because I said 320kbps was good enough? DING! DING! DING! Congratulations, you've just reaffirmed the belief that audiophiles are dicks. You've won a "people are going to avoid trying to help people in this subforum" award.

 

This is why nobody likes you audio subforum. Seriously guys, collectively you all need to grow up.

 

 

There are plenty of "audiophiles" in this community that aren't dicks, but we definitely don't refer to eachother as Audiophiles, because we think the term is retarded and full of idiocy.

[SSL]

There are plenty of "audiophiles" in this community that aren't dicks, but we definitely don't refer to eachother as Audiophiles, because we think the term is retarded and full of idiocy.

 

You can say who the dick is, if you want.