Upgrading from MP3!

[ProfessorStrangeman]

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.

I'm not talking about studies, I'm talking about what I myself have heard.

[chromatome]

The mind is a powerful thing

[ProfessorStrangeman]

The mind is a powerful thing

Agreed. Regardless. I am not here to argue any of this or that, we can make a separate thread for that if we want.

I have gotten what I wanted from this particular thread. Thank you all again for your input on it.

[balakoth]

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

Ill challenge you all day. If you have an issue FEELING sub frequences, then some music must be very boring to you. But its clearly evident to me at all times the difference of the same song mp3 and lossless wav, lacking a FEELINg.. no.. you cant HEAR it.. but frequencies in that range arent heard they arent felt. And thats what you miss out on.

To each their own, my buddy who uses 128 and 320 mp3s sound extremely flat in certain clubs to his mates coming on after who have tried switching him to lossless.

To each their own I suppose. I dont need a study when it feels different to me.. shrug

[balakoth]

FLAC Compression doesnt touch the audio in any way shape or form.. which is why they can be converted back and forth. Louder? If you say so, the algorithm doesnt touch the audio data in that way though

[chromatome]

Exactly. 320 and V0 files are quieter because of the conversion... I'm well aware of the differences, I'm just saying that you can't tell the difference unless you're in a hi-fi listening environment, and even then the differences are minimal. Nightclubs do not have systems that can reap any benefit from using FLAC so I see no reason to use it. Any perceived differences in sub-bass frequencies are just that - perceived. Check out the thread I linked to on head-fi. It's got some great information about the actual encoding processes and what the real differences are. It's about 50/50 there for whether you can hear a difference or not, but it's an audiophile forum so there's a lot of snake oil and placebo effect taking place. The arguments saying that the differences are undetectable are mostly backed up with concrete evidence though.