Which kind of hardware do you need to hear the difference between

File: 1459665399044.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>57512193
You need no hardware because there is no difference. Audiophiles are mentally ill.

File: 1463279287275.jpg (137KB, 979x397px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 979x397px

>>57512240
okay buddy

File: 1478684017347.jpg (35KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 720x720px

>>57512193
Anyone who is over the age of 10 and thinks they can hear the whole spectrum is retarded.
People lose hearing as they age and it is most noticeable in high frequencies.

>all these middle-aged or older men reviewing headphones are actually physically unable to hear shit so they will just make stuff up to justify 30k setups

the more you know

>>57514422
I can still hear the 15.4KHz hissing badly designed CRTs make from tens of meters away. Mind you, I'm a 19 year old aspie, so I don't know if it really counts.

>>57514603
the distortion in >>57512840 is well above 15.4khz though

File: 1359329575088.jpg (686KB, 2524x827px) Image search: [Google]

686KB, 2524x827px

Hoe can you test if you hear it?

>>57514422
it has nothing to do with age and everything to do with exposure

if you're someone that didn't grow up listening to music too loudly, didn't have a computer fan screaming at them within body's range, didn't have apartment per room furnaces/air conditioning units, doesn't ride public transportation every day, and didn't work in a factory, guess what
you can hear more range than the person that did

>>57514653
No real instrument makes sound at such high frequency. There might be some harmonics, but nothing else.

>>57512840

There is obviously a difference. Only idiots would disagree. Can humans tell the difference? No. That is fact.

Folks who say they can tell a difference did a unscientific AB test.

Does that mean you shouldn't get FLAC? No. HDD space is cheap. Why the hell not? Just because I can't tell the difference between the real Mona Lisa and a fake doesn't mean if the are same price (free) I should get the technically inferior version. Just don't pretend that you can tell the difference with your ears. You can't.

File: 1472255803958.jpg (99KB, 798x543px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 798x543px

>>57512240
>not posting the heavy breathing link: 749 dollars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L34S4Tt1EuQ

File: 1452895847184.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>57512840
>21 kHz

Autism: the post

>>57512193
>using constant bitrate

>>57512193
Flac is for burning music cds you plan on playing on a hifi stereo.
Your granny with the dollarama hearing aids will be able to tell the difference.

Of course theres a huge reason to get FLAC

To most it doesn't cost anymore, and also you get the freedom to transcode it to any format you want (because you can't get a direct download of Vorbis), also you can keep it incase newer, more efficient lossy formats come out in the future, where one album (~40min) could take up as little as 20MB of space

That's enough to convince me to keep them