Upgrading from MP3!

[SlvrDragon50]

Uhhh... good luck finding ALAC...

I'm really not sure why you want a lossless format. If you aren't producing, there's reallly no need.

[ProfessorStrangeman]

Uhhh... good luck finding ALAC...

I'm really not sure why you want a lossless format. If you aren't producing, there's reallly no need.

There's no need to FIND .ALAC, if you buy WAV or AIFF you can easily re-encode them to ALAC with no quality loss.

Also, lossless sounds much better on large systems than 320Kbp/s does on large systems.

[makar1]

If you convert a WAV file to 320kbps MP3/AAC, noone will be able to tell the difference on the best of audio equipment. And "large systems" almost always have worse sound quality than a decent pair of headphones.

[ProfessorStrangeman]

If you convert a WAV file to 320kbps MP3/AAC, noone will be able to tell the difference on the best of audio equipment. And "large systems" almost always have worse sound quality than a decent pair of headphones.

I won't be converting to 320 I'll be re-encoding to ALAC.

I don't so much agree with that. I've heard some systems that sound much better having a WAV or other lossless file pumped through than an MP3.

[makar1]

Was the MP3 file tested converted directly from the WAV file being tested?

[ProfessorStrangeman]

Was the MP3 file tested converted directly from the WAV file being tested?

Can't recall that one.

[chromatome]

Also, lossless sounds much better on large systems than 320Kbp/s does on large systems.

If you can tell the difference between flac and a 320 file on a large system in a club or bar (excluding venues with top notch systems like Stereo) then I'll give you a cookie.

[ProfessorStrangeman]

If you can tell the difference between flac and a 320 file on a large system in a club or bar (excluding venues with top notch systems like Stereo) then I'll give you a cookie.

I'm not sure how many systems you've heard but, in the low end of the frequency band and the high end there are very audible differences in quality.

No need for the cookie.

[makar1]

I haven't come across a single properly conducted study that shows an indication that the human ear can discern between a well encoded 320kbps file and the CD source material.

Nor have I come across a large system with audio quality comparable to studio monitors, decent headphones, or a nice home hifi system. Volumes are always way too high to hear the finer points in the sound and there is of course tons of background noise at every venue.

[chromatome]

If you're using LAME 3.99 encoded 320 mp3's and not iTunes encoded, I challenge you to hear the difference at your local club. Most club sound systems get harsh in the high end all by themselves. The biggest differences you'll notice between FLAC and AAC or 320 mp3's or even V0 is going to be the dynamic range - and we're talking about electronic music here where there is very minimal dynamic range anyways. Especially if you're playing club music. Club systems are NOT hi-fi systems. Don't make that mistake. I've done the double blind test in this studio http://www.lelabmastering.com/en/studio listening to both electronic music and other genres as well and could only hear differences in empty space and the decay of some highs, and it was very minimal differences. No differences were heard in the low end though.

FLAC will be louder files though, which is why some people will claim to be able to hear such drastic differences in the high and low ends because they don't match the volumes of their two comparison files.

This thread on HeadFi is interesting. Lots of snake oil over there, but this thread is mostly on topic.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/570621/flac-vs-320-mp3