Quote
Mathijs

Quote
StonesTod
incidentally, there isn't a soul among us who could tell the difference in sound between these mp3's and the flac files...anyone who says otherwise is a fibber.

Then I am a fibber, whatever that means. With proper headphones I can tell mp3 and the even worse m4a format apart from flac within 3 seconds. And it's easy, if you know what to listen for: mp3 sounds 'empty' in a sense, there's no fatness or 'fullnes' to it, as. It's like the heart of the spectrum is missing.

Good vinyl always had this great 3D quality to it, with real depth. No digital format has ever been able to replicate that, but mp3 really is a couple of steps down over lossless.

Mathijs

i agree with you about the vinyl thing. but you take a 256 or higher mp3 sound file and take a lossless and i bet you couldn't tell me which was which more than 50% of the time. betcha betcha betcha....

I'm still thinking about that aud recording vs. pea soup theory...

Quote
steel driving hammer
I'm still thinking about that aud recording vs. pea soup theory...

try eating thick pea soup while MAKING an audience recording. very few successful attempts have been made at that...

The flacs ROCK

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
steel driving hammer
I'm still thinking about that aud recording vs. pea soup theory...

try eating thick pea soup while MAKING an audience recording. very few successful attempts have been made at that...

Especially if you take Linda Blair along with you to the show. It's enough to make you jump out the window....

Quote
studiorambo
Realistically, few people can legitimately claim to hear a 'real' difference between commercially encoded 256kbps AAC files from iTunes or the commercially encoded mp3's files from google and a CD. The home-bake AAC and mp3 rips from a CD is a different story. That said, I purchased the flac files from StonesArchive because that allows me to make a clean encode to the itunes consistent 256kbps AAC format. I detest different file formats, bitrates etc. I like to keep things consistent.

What program did you use to get AAC's from Flac?

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
StonesTod
incidentally, there isn't a soul among us who could tell the difference in sound between these mp3's and the flac files...anyone who says otherwise is a fibber.

Then I am a fibber, whatever that means. With proper headphones I can tell mp3 and the even worse m4a format apart from flac within 3 seconds. And it's easy, if you know what to listen for: mp3 sounds 'empty' in a sense, there's no fatness or 'fullnes' to it, as. It's like the heart of the spectrum is missing.

Good vinyl always had this great 3D quality to it, with real depth. No digital format has ever been able to replicate that, but mp3 really is a couple of steps down over lossless.

Mathijs

i agree with you about the vinyl thing. but you take a 256 or higher mp3 sound file and take a lossless and i bet you couldn't tell me which was which more than 50% of the time. betcha betcha betcha....

You sir, are out of your flac'in mind!

I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

Very well said.

I downloaded it on flac....that part went well Now what??
Aaaah shite, bring me the record and cd please

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

My dog can notice the difference, and he's pretty pissed off I opted to save the 2 bucks and go with MP3. He's not speaking to me right now.

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works .

I think that both can work, though,depending on what you want to do with it

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

My dog can notice the difference, and he's pretty pissed off I opted to save the 2 bucks and go with MP3. He's not speaking to me right now.

well, i went with the free flac files and my german shepherd and i are chatting it up bigtime...you gotta consider these things when making your selections...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-22 19:48 by StonesTod.

Quote
SwayStones

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works .

I think that both can work, though,depending on what you want to do with it

I ate 2 big macs last night, and I felt like throwing up...but you're right, had I thrown up, I would be hungry very quickly again, after the nausea subsided.

Quote
SwayStones

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works.

That's McDonalds with their chemists. Its been said that they use chemicals that trick the brain into wanting more. Who can not finish a McDonalds burger? Sodium also intensifys cravings.

Quote
SwayStones

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works .

I think that both can work, though,depending on what you want to do with it

BTW...just wanted to confirm Filet Mignon isn't pork...may something have gotten lost in the translation?

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
SwayStones

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works .

I think that both can work, though,depending on what you want to do with it

BTW...just wanted to confirm Filet Mignon isn't pork...may something have gotten lost in the translation?

file mignon is horsemeat....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-22 21:49 by StonesTod.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

Obviously some people can tell the difference even with highest bitrate MP3...

Quote
kowalski

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

Obviously some people can tell the difference even with highest bitrate MP3...

Could be, I don't know. Personally I'd like to see a blind study done. Just like Stradivarius violins are lauded for their "superior sound" but in almost every blind study people can't tell the difference or often choose the other instrument as sounding superior. I've seen FLAC torrents praised for their superior sound only for it to be pointed out that somebody just converted mp3 files into a FLAC file, and it wasn't a FLAC source.

I'm a Pearl Jam fan, and every day I see over there on their board people talking about the superior sound of the vinyl. But the problem is that the vinyl has the same mix, coming from a digital source, as the CD and not recorded or mixed specifically for vinyl. And there is no sonic difference, identical wave forms, etc. Yet people get it stuck in their head vinyl is better, and swear by those albums.

I'm not saying that's the case here, but it could play a factor. The difference COULD be in their head.

I don't think the point is listening to FLAC, I think the point is to have a master lossless copy from which to make your compressed listening copies.

Although listening to FLAC on my computer cuts out all the middle crap!

Once a song has been compressed, there is no longer anyway to tell what bitrate it is with certainty unless you've created it yourself, and sometimes they sound like crap. If you convert your FLAC file to 320K and enjoy, then no I don't think you could really tell a difference.

But if you didn't convert it and it sounds a little off, you'd have to wonder what's wrong with it since you didn't source it yourself...

Quote
kowalski

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

Obviously some people can tell the difference even with highest bitrate MP3...

I couldn't care even the tiniest bit-rate.

Quote
NoCode0680

Quote
kowalski

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

Obviously some people can tell the difference even with highest bitrate MP3...

Could be, I don't know. Personally I'd like to see a blind study done. Just like Stradivarius violins are lauded for their "superior sound" but in almost every blind study people can't tell the difference or often choose the other instrument as sounding superior. I've seen FLAC torrents praised for their superior sound only for it to be pointed out that somebody just converted mp3 files into a FLAC file, and it wasn't a FLAC source.

I'm a Pearl Jam fan, and every day I see over there on their board people talking about the superior sound of the vinyl. But the problem is that the vinyl has the same mix, coming from a digital source, as the CD and not recorded or mixed specifically for vinyl. And there is no sonic difference, identical wave forms, etc. Yet people get it stuck in their head vinyl is better, and swear by those albums.

I'm not saying that's the case here, but it could play a factor. The difference COULD be in their head.

I agree it can be very subtle differences and I have to listen with headphones to hear them. Differences are particularly noticeable on trebles (cymbals sounds for example) and basses. With MP3, definition is not as good. However if I don't pay attention I wouldn't make the difference between a MP3 at 320kb/s and a FLAC file.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
SwayStones

Quote
schillid

Quote
treaclefingers
FLAC is like Filet Mignon
MP3 is like a Big Mac

And when you're hungry, you eat either one.

schillid , that's a weird comparision imo.
Since I don't eat pork ,I won't tell about Filet Mignon but beleive me ,when I eat a Big Mac , first I feel full but ,I am getting hungry again very quickly .
That's the way it works .

I think that both can work, though,depending on what you want to do with it

BTW...just wanted to confirm Filet Mignon isn't pork...may something have gotten lost in the translation?

file mignon is horsemeat....

They shoot horsemeat, don't they? Or something...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
StonesTod
incidentally, there isn't a soul among us who could tell the difference in sound between these mp3's and the flac files...anyone who says otherwise is a fibber.

Then I am a fibber, whatever that means. With proper headphones I can tell mp3 and the even worse m4a format apart from flac within 3 seconds. And it's easy, if you know what to listen for: mp3 sounds 'empty' in a sense, there's no fatness or 'fullnes' to it, as. It's like the heart of the spectrum is missing.

Good vinyl always had this great 3D quality to it, with real depth. No digital format has ever been able to replicate that, but mp3 really is a couple of steps down over lossless.

Mathijs

i agree with you about the vinyl thing. but you take a 256 or higher mp3 sound file and take a lossless and i bet you couldn't tell me which was which more than 50% of the time. betcha betcha betcha....

Again,the term " lossless " is used to describe 2 different grades of music.

" Losless " is most often used to describe music with no loss versus the 16 bit CD quality version which itself ( the CD quality 16 bit version ) is actually lossy,compressed,downgraded from the studio masters.

Truly " losless " music is 24 bit audio from the studio masters. [www.iorr.org]

FLAC files come in both varieties. Please specify next time instead of making blanket statements. Thank you.

Should you even be qualified to speak on this subject after the # of concerts that you've been to?? Don't you think that a degree of hearing loss is a strong possibility here??

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
StonesTod
incidentally, there isn't a soul among us who could tell the difference in sound between these mp3's and the flac files...anyone who says otherwise is a fibber.

Then I am a fibber, whatever that means. With proper headphones I can tell mp3 and the even worse m4a format apart from flac within 3 seconds. And it's easy, if you know what to listen for: mp3 sounds 'empty' in a sense, there's no fatness or 'fullnes' to it, as. It's like the heart of the spectrum is missing.

Good vinyl always had this great 3D quality to it, with real depth. No digital format has ever been able to replicate that, but mp3 really is a couple of steps down over lossless.

Mathijs

i agree with you about the vinyl thing. but you take a 256 or higher mp3 sound file and take a lossless and i bet you couldn't tell me which was which more than 50% of the time. betcha betcha betcha....

Again,the term " lossless " is used to describe 2 different grades of music.

" Losless " is most often used to describe music with no loss versus the 16 bit CD quality version which itself ( the CD quality 16 bit version ) is actually lossy,compressed,downgraded from the studio masters.

Truly " losless " music is 24 bit audio from the studio masters. [www.iorr.org]

FLAC files come in both varieties. Please specify next time instead of making blanket statements. Thank you.

Should you even be qualified to speak on this subject after the # of concerts that you've been to?? Don't you think that a degree of hearing loss is a strong possibility here??

my loss of hearing applies equally to flac and mp3. that blanket should cover me for now.

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

If " a set of good audiophile headphones " is the only noteworthy piece of equipment involved,that may be your reason right there.

The price of admission to the world of true high fidelity audio is much more steep (unfortunately) than the price of some headphones even though good headphones can serve a purpose.

Like I posted on page 2 of this thread,mobile on the go type of playback equipment is less likely to make differences evident.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

horrible post - horrible

You can lead a deaf horse to water but you can't make them drink it.

Once you start talking 128 k.b.p.s. MP3's you're getting close to the territory of fingernails against a chalkboard.

I have quite successfully identified low bit-rate MP3 based CD-R's without any problem or doubt just based on listening to them in my wife's car on her mid-fi (to be generous) factory car audio system.

If you keep insisting that there's no difference,you're using sub-par pieces of equipment OR you don't have ENOUGH quality equipment (it takes much MORE THAN 1 PIECE),and/or it is not set up and configured properly,and/or you have at least some degree of hearing loss.

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

If " a set of good audiophile headphones " is the only noteworthy piece of equipment involved,that may be your reason right there.

The price of admission to the world of true high fidelity audio is much more steep (unfortunately) than the price of some headphones even though good headphones can serve a purpose.

Like I posted on page 2 of this thread,mobile on the go type of playback equipment is less likely to make differences evident.

Well, I don't use them on my iPod. My iPod is mainly just for my car. I use the headphones on my stereo system and my computer. But if it takes a lot of high end equipment to tell the difference between FLAC and mp3 then I would imagine most people don't need FLAC.

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
NoCode0680
I have pretty good ears, and a set of good audiophile headphones I listen to most of my music through (unless I'm in the car), and I can really tell no difference between FLAC and mp3, at least on Brussels affair. I've also compared various Pearl Jam concerts on both formats. Maybe for a studio recording it will be more noticeable, I have yet to compare any of that stuff though, just live recordings.

I bought the mp3 of Brussels Affair, and I asked a guy to send me his FLAC files for comparison to see if I want to buy them for the 5 future releases. If there is any difference (other than price) it is not noticeable to me. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but as far as my ears are concerned there is none.

again, these are at a high enough bitrate where there's no way anybody can tell the difference v. lossless. you get down to maybe 128 and discerning ears can spot things.

horrible post - horrible

You can lead a deaf horse to water but you can't make them drink it.

Once you start talking 128 k.b.p.s. MP3's you're getting close to the territory of fingernails against a chalkboard.

I have quite successfully identified low bit-rate MP3 based CD-R's without any problem or doubt just based on listening to them in my wife's car on her mid-fi (to be generous) factory car audio system.

If you keep insisting that there's no difference,you're using sub-par pieces of equipment OR you don't have ENOUGH quality equipment (it takes much MORE THAN 1 PIECE),and/or it is not set up and configured properly,and/or you have at least some degree of hearing loss.

i will take all these things into consideration before my next horrible post.

in the meantime i wish you success in your remarkable abilities to discern the indiscernible.