HD 650 ruined meSubmitted by GLikesSteak t3_10l1wbb in headphones
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5ucj86 wrote
Reply to comment by No-Context5479 in HD 650 ruined me by GLikesSteak
It’s Oggs so yes it is. Codec matters
No-Context5479 t1_j5udw74 wrote
OGG isn't the codec... The codec is called Vorbis. OGG is the container like MQA, FLAC. With Vorbis being the codec used to store data in OGG container.
Also Vorbis is a very efficient codec, much better than mp3 and generally able to maintain a higher level of audio quality at lower bitrates meaning less data used for the same fidelity.
MQA is trash and also lossy like OGG Vorbis but that's a talk for another day... Have a good day
PetersenIsMyDaddy t1_j5vlt0q wrote
FLAC is a codec, it’s literally in the name
No-Context5479 t1_j5w7y79 wrote
FLAC is both a container and the codec... Yes I should've been more specific in that regard but you can store .wav files in a flac container... Same as lossy files being polished as flac files when they're not lossless files
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5uevt1 wrote
It’s ogg Vorbis, I was shortening it.
It’s efficient but it doesn’t sound good vs other options that offer lossless audio streaming
No-Context5479 t1_j5ufuuj wrote
The only objectively "better" service would be Apple's Hi Res Lossless Option for streaming, AmazonHD's Hi-Fi, Qobuz, Deezer Hi-Fi but in the end most people can't tell the difference unless they're actively listening for differences... I can tell the differences but honestly for most times I'm not looking for which pin dropped in the studio Spotify is near identical when actually enjoying music and not trying to not pick. I have lossless CDs and stuff saved through Qobuz but I use those rarely and would cancel my Qobuz subscription soon.
What even is better is getting a well mastered and dynamic range checked piece of music... If it's lossy, doesn't matter, that would sound far better than a terribly mastered and dynamic range squashed recording that is in lossless form.. but hey, "lossless" is better I guess.
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5ugh8f wrote
Generally lossless files are mastered better. That’s why apple has its digital masters or “mastered for iTunes” badge as they’re mastered for lossless playback
No-Context5479 t1_j5uhbcj wrote
I can list so many lossless albums with terrible dynamic range and shit mastering but yes generally Lossless albums should have more fidelity honestly
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5uhhes wrote
And if they can’t master for lossless then they’re not going to be able to do it for sub CD quality either will they?
No-Context5479 t1_j5uhprl wrote
Reason why I said mixing and mastering is actually more important than fussing over if something is lossy... I'd take a genuinely good master at 256kbps over some jumbled mess of a dynamic range read at 1411 kbps
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5ui288 wrote
Point was that the masters of a particular song will be the same regardless so the same file in FLAC vs say MP3 will have the same bad master. The FLAC will still sound the better of the two
No-Context5479 t1_j5uiqtv wrote
I think we'd have to end it here... I'm just of the view 320kbps OGG Vorbis is very capable and .flac or .alac files will be "better" but not by a humongous margin that will call for people to overhaul their listening services. You're on Apple Music, kudos. Someone too is on Spotify, more power to them. Another loves their .wav offline stuff, they can carry on and be satisfied regardless.👍🏾
Pigeon_Chess t1_j5uj2um wrote
Again it’s more that you’re spending money on headphones, DACs and amps. Why use lossy audio formats? You’re literally wasting money on the amps and DACs at that point
No-Context5479 t1_j5uj57n wrote
Sigh... GGs I guess
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments