Author Topic: So... lossless formats  (Read 9657 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
So... lossless formats
« on: August 28, 2010, 09:41:58 AM »
I'm going to describe my experience with lossless music files, because it's been pretty disillusioning for me. The other day, I got the idea to take all my music off of my computer and re-rip all my CDs as 600MB per album Windows Media Lossless files. I did some side by side comparisons between my 320kbps files and my new lossless ones while wearing my sound-board headphones, and, honestly, I couldn't notice a difference. Then, I ripped some CDs as 128kbps second, and compared those side by side with my lossless files, and I STILL couldn't notice anything different.

What's going on? Am I doing it wrong? Or will you only notice the difference on special speakers, or certain volumes, etc.

Offline sonatafanica

  • cocksucking maniac
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4660
  • Gender: Female
  • ☠☠☠☠☠☠jesus take the wheel☠☠☠☠☠☠
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2010, 09:42:49 AM »
Your ears are n00bs

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 53216
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2010, 09:44:54 AM »
The differences won't be as dramatic if you are listening on cheap computer speakers or earbuds.

Of course, your ears might suck.  To me, even on computer speakers, there is a difference between 128kb and 320kb, not to mention between 128kb and lossless.

So be of good cheer, and don't go to the trouble of re-ripping everything if you can't tell the difference.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline The King in Crimson

  • Stuck in a glass dome since 1914!
  • Posts: 4002
  • Gender: Male
  • Mr. Sandman, Give Me A Dream
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2010, 09:51:11 AM »
I'm the same way... kinda, though my ears are just shitty.

I notice a slight difference between a low quality rip and a CD, but put a high quality rip (a 256k+ rip) and a CD next to each other and I likely won't be able to tell the difference.


Offline robwebster

  • Posts: 5021
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2010, 09:54:21 AM »
You should be able to hear something of a difference between 128kbps and lossless, but you shouldn't particularly be able to hear any difference between 320kbps and lossless, as 320kbps is way faster than the average human ear can process information.

Lossless is more important for storage than for listening. As you don't lose any information whatsoever, your entire storage of CDs could be totally obliterated and you'd still have all the information you paid for, so that's a grand thing about lossless. It's also handy for ripping CDs. You could burn a 320kbps MP3 to a disc for a friend, and then when they ripped it to their hard drive it'd cascade, because the dropped information won't necessarily match up.

So yeah, it's nifty if you've got the space for it, but don't let anyone tell you you're missing out by listening to your MP3s, because you really, really aren't. Your ears are fine. Normal, in fact. Possibly slightly above average!

You know how films are just an endless flipbook of teeny, tiny snapshots? Music's the same. And just as you can't see empty frames between images at the cinema, you can't hear the empty frames between the noises of a high-bitrate MP3. A pigeon's eye works faster than a human one - they wouldn't understand a film at all. But the human eye is deceived by film, and in exactly the same way, the ear is deceived by a 320kbps MP3.

If you can't tell the difference, it's not 'cause your ears are untrained, it's because you can not tell the difference.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2010, 09:58:15 AM »
Your ears are n00bs

This is pretty much the best answer. If you can't tell the difference between 128 and lossless there is something wrong with your ears.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2010, 10:00:47 AM »
128 and lower, the cymbals start to sound funny. Sometimes I can hear it with 192 but higher than that, it sounds the same as lossless. I only re-rip in lossless when I want the tracks to segue into each other with no popping, because even the highest quality mp3 bitrate creates that fucking popping.

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2010, 10:05:09 AM »
128 and lower, the cymbals start to sound funny. Sometimes I can hear it with 192 but higher than that, it sounds the same as lossless. I only re-rip in lossless when I want the tracks to segue into each other with no popping, because even the highest quality mp3 bitrate creates that fucking popping.

I can definitely hear the difference with under 128kbps.

@robwebster: Why do you always have to make so much sense?

Anyway, I guess that's it for me giving lossless a chance. One day, when I have a bigger harddrive, I'd like to rip everything as lossless for the sake of storage. But now, there really seems to be no reason for me to do so.

Offline ariich

  • Roulette Supervillain
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Gender: Male
  • sexin' you later
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2010, 10:12:52 AM »
You should be able to hear something of a difference between 128kbps and lossless, but you shouldn't particularly be able to hear any difference between 320kbps and lossless, as 320kbps is way faster than the average human ear can process information.

Lossless is more important for storage than for listening. As you don't lose any information whatsoever, your entire storage of CDs could be totally obliterated and you'd still have all the information you paid for, so that's a grand thing about lossless. It's also handy for ripping CDs. You could burn a 320kbps MP3 to a disc for a friend, and then when they ripped it to their hard drive it'd cascade, because the dropped information won't necessarily match up.

So yeah, it's nifty if you've got the space for it, but don't let anyone tell you you're missing out by listening to your MP3s, because you really, really aren't. Your ears are fine. Normal, in fact. Possibly slightly above average!

You know how films are just an endless flipbook of teeny, tiny snapshots? Music's the same. And just as you can't see empty frames between images at the cinema, you can't hear the empty frames between the noises of a high-bitrate MP3. A pigeon's eye works faster than a human one - they wouldn't understand a film at all. But the human eye is deceived by film, and in exactly the same way, the ear is deceived by a 320kbps MP3.

If you can't tell the difference, it's not 'cause your ears are untrained, it's because you can not tell the difference.
Well said! :tup To the human ear there's no difference between 320kpbs and lossless.

Although it's more concerning if you can't hear the difference with 128kbps. That's as low as I'll go in my music collection, and even then I can hear the difference between that and 192, but I use it sometimes to save on storage space.

Ariich is a freak, or somehow has more hours in the day than everyone else.
I be am boner inducing.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2010, 10:14:11 AM »
128 and lower, the cymbals start to sound funny. Sometimes I can hear it with 192 but higher than that, it sounds the same as lossless. I only re-rip in lossless when I want the tracks to segue into each other with no popping, because even the highest quality mp3 bitrate creates that fucking popping.

At 320 the cymbals start to sound funny, especially certain ones.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2010, 10:16:30 AM »
You're one of those Snobby McSnobface audiophiles aren't you, Nick?

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2010, 10:23:02 AM »
You're one of those Snobby McSnobface audiophiles aren't you, Nick?

Yes and no. I personally enjoy full quality audio, but I don't care if others do or not. I just get annoyed when others pass around shit sound and act like it's just as good as full quality.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2010, 10:34:21 AM »
Maybe you can explain to me about FLAC. It's compressed like 30% but it's still compressed so why does everyone praise it so much?

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2010, 10:37:11 AM »
Because it's lossless, FLAC is purely an improved encoding of a sound file, not a compression of it. MP3 and OGG and such do have improved encoding that reduces the file size, but it also compresses the file cutting sound out of it in order to get the size down a lot more. FLAC is the best way to store and send lossless music because it is only 70%ish the size of a WAV file and it still has the full sound, hence why it's called lossless.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Offline ariich

  • Roulette Supervillain
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Gender: Male
  • sexin' you later
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2010, 10:37:45 AM »
The file is compressed because it is encoded, but when decoded it has 100% of the original information (so you could convert back into the original audio files). Whereas the way mp3 is encoded causes it to lose information.

Ariich is a freak, or somehow has more hours in the day than everyone else.
I be am boner inducing.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2010, 10:38:38 AM »
He asked me you slow British noob.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2010, 10:57:00 AM »
Thanks for the info guys :tup

Offline Perpetual Change

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12264
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2010, 10:57:42 AM »
You're one of those Snobby McSnobface audiophiles aren't you, Nick?

Yes and no. I personally enjoy full quality audio, but I don't care if others do or not. I just get annoyed when others pass around shit sound and act like it's just as good as full quality.
Maybe YOU have messed up ears which make you incredibly high-maintenance when you listen to music  ;D

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2010, 11:00:11 AM »
It's my hot body, I'll do what I want!

Seriously though, if full CD quality didn't want my love, then it shouldn't have gone out showing off that hole in the middle.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Offline MetalManiac666

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2650
  • Gender: Male
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2010, 11:04:47 AM »
lol

Offline ariich

  • Roulette Supervillain
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Gender: Male
  • sexin' you later
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2010, 11:22:36 AM »
It's my hot body, I'll do what I want!

Seriously though, if full CD quality didn't want my love, then it shouldn't have gone out showing off that hole in the middle.
CD quality is pretty crap with all that "limited to 44khz" lameness. I invite bands round to play it to me live, so I can enjoy the full-quality experience.

Ariich is a freak, or somehow has more hours in the day than everyone else.
I be am boner inducing.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2010, 11:24:23 AM »
Noob, if you want better quality you gotta get DVD audio, 24-bit and 48khz!
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Offline Groundhog

  • Posts: 193
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2010, 11:43:50 AM »
It's probably because of your gear... or your ears.   :P

The difference between 128 kbs and cd quality is huge. The basic soundcards in computers aren't good and 10 dollar headphones certainly aren't good, whatever that site says. "high end" parts... hah.

When the equipment can't produce the whole frequency range, good dynamics and a good soundstage the difference between lossless and 320 kbs sounds pretty much the same. I use good quality Sony headphones with my iPhone and was hard pressed to tell the difference between a lossless and 320 kbs file. The latter had just a tad more sibilance, but it took me several listens to notice. So no need for lossless on my iPhone. But on my home stereo it's really a different thing. Then mp3 just doesn't cut it.

So in a nutshell if you dont' hear the difference between 320 kbs and lossless, it's just your gear.

Offline Gorille85

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4105
  • Gender: Male
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2010, 11:44:57 AM »
It also depends on what you're listening to.

Offline glaurung

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 4466
  • Gender: Male
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2010, 11:56:26 AM »
There isn't enough of a difference between 320kbs and lossless for me to care.
Cole: "Ow I just got hit in the balls"
Me: "How?"
Cole: "Well you know when you try to scratch your balls, and you scratch too hard?
I'll admit sometimes I want to listen to Dragonforce.

Offline TL

  • Posts: 2793
  • Gender: Male
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2010, 12:09:29 PM »
One important thing to mention is that it also depends on the quality of the original recording. If something isn't recorded/mastered particularly well, there probably won't be as much of a difference at higher quality.

As has been said though, for most music, if you can't tell the difference between 128kbs and lossless, you need new speakers/headphones.

Offline Sigz

  • BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13537
  • Gender: Male
  • THRONES FOR THE THRONE SKULL
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2010, 12:15:11 PM »
There isn't enough of a difference between 320kbs and lossless for me to care.
Quote
The world is a stage, but the play is badly cast.

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2010, 12:41:47 PM »
For future reference, can someone recommend me some good affordable headphones? I bought a pair of Sony "over the ear" dynamic stereo blah blah blah for $30 dollars but they sounded very muddy. I asked this in DT-Side chat a couple weeks ago and was ignored. Thanks.

Offline ariich

  • Roulette Supervillain
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 28047
  • Gender: Male
  • sexin' you later
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #29 on: August 28, 2010, 12:44:09 PM »
I always go for in-ear earphones personally, especially for out and about.

Ariich is a freak, or somehow has more hours in the day than everyone else.
I be am boner inducing.

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #30 on: August 28, 2010, 12:46:50 PM »
What I liked a lot about the muddy Sony's is the kick they had. I don't get that with my in ear or clip on whatevers.

Offline ZBomber

  • "The Analogy Guy"
  • Posts: 5502
  • Gender: Male
  • A Farewell to Kings
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #31 on: August 28, 2010, 12:54:36 PM »
The only time I care about lossles vs lossy is when I'm playing music on my surround sound system. On my computer, I don't have a problem with MP3. But the difference is very apparent on higher end gear.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #32 on: August 28, 2010, 12:58:35 PM »
The only time I care about lossles vs lossy is when I'm playing music on my surround sound system. On my computer, I don't have a problem with MP3. But the difference is very apparent on higher end gear.

I'm the same way, I have one premium system and that's when I care about what I'm playing on it, otherwise I'm not very picky.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Online Zook

  • Evil Incarnate
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14160
  • Gender: Male
  • Take My Hand
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #33 on: August 28, 2010, 01:39:39 PM »
Son of a bitch.

Offline Groundhog

  • Posts: 193
Re: So... lossless formats
« Reply #34 on: August 28, 2010, 01:51:57 PM »
I don't have much experience with headphones, but I'd suggest you to try something from Grado, Sennheiser, AKG or Bayerdynamic.