Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

No-Context5479 t1_j5uhbcj wrote

Reply to comment by Pigeon_Chess in HD 650 ruined me by GLikesSteak

I can list so many lossless albums with terrible dynamic range and shit mastering but yes generally Lossless albums should have more fidelity honestly

6

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?

1

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

6

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

1

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.👍🏾

3

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

1