DepressMyCNS t1_iy9xkoh wrote on November 29, 2022 at 9:04 PM

I'm sorry but the difference between FLAC and MP3 is very apparent to me. At least when using my DAC/Amp combo with my HD800s or listening on my hifi speakers. I've sat and compared specific sections of songs for clarity and lack of added noise etc. When I was testing out streaming services. The results were very clear, 320kbps has less detail in the specific tonal qualities of instruments and has an added noise floor, meanwhile FLAC has the cleanest noise floor, retains the most details in the instruments and has a much better bass response (this even takes effect on my car stereo which is not the greatest). I also confirmed there is a difference between "True Lossless" and "Compressed Lossless" Tidal MQA was better than mp3, but the noise floor presented its own artifacts that when compared to true lossless flac from Qobuz. Lastly there's a difference between 16-bit and 24-bit if you can't hear the differences you're either being limited by your equipment(unlikely, as mentioned shitty car stereo picked up these differences too), limited by your hearing, or you just don't know what you're listening for when it comes to comparing format quality. Since discovering the beauty of FLAC I've loved going back to old albums I loved and hearing all kinds of new details I never picked up before. It honestly transforms some songs completely, especially older music from the 90s and earlier.

But all that technical nitpicking aside, honestly I'd rather listen to 128kbps than have no music at all.

TL;DR FLAC is honestly much better for a lot of reasons, I spent hours testing with high-end and low end gear to make sure I was getting the best value.

[deleted] t1_iyageud wrote on November 29, 2022 at 11:10 PM

You have what we call golden ears 😂 I have HD800s myself and a decent amp and honestly I still can't tell a difference. Both 320 kbps and Lossless sound fantastic to me. I archive lossless on my laptop and harddrives and convert to 320 on music player. If I could hear a major difference I'd probably add lossless to my player, but alas I don't have golden ears.

DepressMyCNS t1_iybl9e4 wrote on November 30, 2022 at 4:25 AM

Haha I'll have to get myself a golden ear trophy for my decorations lol. Seriously though I understand the sentiment of saying "there's no difference", music is music after all, and both do sound fantastic, but after spending $2600 on headphones, dac/amp and $7000 on a hifi Dolby Atmos setup I wanted to make sure I was getting the most out of my equipment. Another reason I spent the time testing was because I was subscribed to 3 different streaming services at the time and wanted to save some money by switching to just one. I literally sat there and compared 5-10 second long segments of songs and listened to specific tonal qualities of the instruments and vocals, how long the resonances lasted, minute background details such as breaths being taken or fingers scraping against strings, keys clacking, noise floor etc. Extreme critical listening stuff your average person isn't checking for when just putting something on to jam to. I think that's the perfect setup honestly lossless at home lossy on the go. Luckily I live in an area with really good 5g coverage so I can just stream 16-bit or 24-bit lossless straight from Qobuz without buffering. Best of both worlds really.

Have you had a chance to listen or compare and 16 to 24 bit music? Surprisingly there's a difference there as well, it's much more subtle but it has a slight loudness boost and way better depth to the low end of tracks. The first 24 bit CD I bought was Post Malone's Beerbongs and Bentleys and I had to adjust my subwoofer from the added bass 😂. Also have you heard any DOLBY Atmos or 360 Audio content? It's not lossless but it adds a whole different feel to music as well having specific instruments sounding as if they're placed throughout the room not coming from the speakers, it's evolutionary stuff, I can't wait till they come up with a lossless spatial audio now that will be something!

[deleted] t1_iybppg2 wrote on November 30, 2022 at 5:07 AM

That’s a very good point. You’re making me reconsider a little. Lol. I spent a lot on speakers headphones and amps. I play mostly lossless audio on my speakers for the same reason as you. Why not on my headphones as well?

WhiskeyGnomes t1_iya54no wrote on November 29, 2022 at 9:52 PM

You'll get downvoted by angry tweens who only have their entire collection in 128 or some shit. Opus is transparent guys. I've never heard audio except on my airpods and shit, but I read some studies, and they 100% definitive. Your ears can't hear the difference.

LMAO. If you pinpoint a lot of specific tracks and areas in tracks in particular, you can easily hear differences. It's really not that hard. Double Blind studies don't give one enough time with a track. When given the time, you start spotting the differences in back to backs. That alone is enough for me to stick with FLAC. It might not really be huge all the time, but it's a difference.

DepressMyCNS t1_iya6qxi wrote on November 29, 2022 at 10:03 PM

You get me man. I did the tests myself because I wanted to see where I should spend my money, the answer was very clear.

WhiskeyGnomes t1_iya7duk wrote on November 29, 2022 at 10:07 PM

I mean don't get me wrong Opus is great, but I am not converting my entire collection to Opus. I just don't even fucking care. Who needs that space? Why? Any phone with 128GB of storage and that is literally all I need for work and way more. Hell, I am getting by with 70GB of music in FLAC on my phone. I rarely have too many issues with albums. I could save some space going Opus, but I really just don't care.

The whole debate is pointless right now. I don't even understand the obsession with lossy at this point in time. I guess if you are dirt poor with only 2GB of space on your phone it could help.