>not listening to flac in 2017 Explain yourself anon

>>74531310
Takes up more space and consumes massive amounts of CPU resources and kills battery life on mobile devices for no audible improvement in quality. FLAC is for archiving, not listening.

>>74531340
>t. shitty headphone owner

>>74531483
t. technologically illiterate placebo monger who thinks he can hear above 20khz

[spoiler]you can't[/spoiler]

>>74531540
There's still an audible difference

>>74531540
I bet you also think you can't see the difference between 30 and 60 fps or 24/48 in films.

File: 1502392995031.png (48KB, 230x208px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 230x208px

.wav is better

I enjoy compressed sound

>>74531310
It's the name.

>>74531598
Yeah no ways there's any difference between 1Mb/s and 128kb/s

>>74531591
Any lossless is better than lossy desu

>>74531571
No, there isn't. Blind A/B tests confirm this. VBR above 200 kpbs is transparent to 99.9% of humans and above 300 kpbs is transparent to the remaining .01%
>>74531580
Correct. Human physiology is limited.

>>74531598
This but unironically.
Most music sounds better on youtube. It's black magic.

>>74531730
>Correct. Human physiology is limited.
Woah, woah, woah. So you're saying humans can't tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps?
Bait confirmed.

>>74531730
Jeez I wonder why flac sounds better to so many people and artists still release in flac. Weird

>>74531730
people can tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps

>>74531580
Comparing 30 and 60 FPS is like comparing 320 kbps to 192 kbps, there definitely is a difference

but anyone who's saying he can hear a difference between 320 kbps CBR and lossless is a troll

>>74531776
jeez. i wonder why people rate the same food more highly when they pay more for it. i wonder why people claim electronically mastered stuff sounds better on vinyl. i wonder why people like beats by dre so fucking much. i wonder how many times your mama dropped you on your head.

>>74531814
>t. someone who's never listened to 5mb/s flac with high-end headphones before

>>74531821
Seems like you know more than people who actually make music
>how many times your mama dropped you on your head
3 times and once was in the pool

>>74531774
The human eye can't perceive changes in motion above a certain threshold. All you're getting out of it is more detail.
>>74531776
It doesn't. Blind A/B tests confirm this over and over again. Not that weird, actually. We discovered the placebo effect a century ago.

File: 1501483800451.png (462KB, 579x482px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 579x482px

>>74531845
>5mb with high end headphones
Sounds pretty comfy anon

>>74531340
>consumes massive amounts of CPU resources

>>74531845
>t. somebody who spent too much money on "high-end headphones"
you know they've actually performed studies about this right
you cannot tell the difference between 320kbps and flac, but human subjectivity is a wonderful thing so if flac makes you feel like your music is better then by all means go for it

>>74531864
So I spent $400 on a 144hz monitor for placebo? Wew I'm pretty stupid it seems

>>74531862
>Seems like you know more than people who actually make music
No one who actually makes music distributes in FLAC. They record in uncompressed WAV (at 48khz, mastered to 44.1khz for CD), or to analog tape, and distribute in lossy compression through whichever platform they use. And a lot of people who make music are utterly ignorant of recording technology and signal science. The recording and mastering engineers are who you should be talking to.

>>74531845
Go ahead, convert your FLAC to a 320 kbps using LAME (foobar2000 plugin) and hear it for yourself. You're not proving anything and not trolling anyone.

>>74531893
I wasn't aware we were using computers from the 90s, anon

>>74531862
people release flac because there's a demand for it, half of which is from retards like you who think it 'sounds better', but it's also the standard archival format and it's preferable for sampling/remixing. and btw your average recording artist is not necessarily an expert in the science of human hearing with regards to audio encoding - they mostly spend their time making cool music.

File: 1502205891796.png (748KB, 800x1144px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 800x1144px

>>74531903
>>t. somebody who spent too much money on "high-end headphones"
You poor ignorant sod. You have no idea what you're missing out on.
They were worth every cent and more.

>>74531903
>you cannot tell the difference between 320kbps and flac
you easily can if you know what to listen for.
pro tipp: it's not frequencies over 20khz

>>74531919
Makes no difference for film. The difference in gaming is purely down to latency and server sync. Most of your games probably don't run at more than 144 FPS anyway, and you probably never turned off Vsync on your driver, so yeah, you paid for nothing. And you're proud of your abject ignorance.
>>74531939
The 8 core ARM CPU in your phone will tear through your 3,000 mAh battery a lot faster at 8-15% CPU load than it will at 2-3% CPU load. Modernity has nothing to do with it.

>>74531980
These anons are missing out on so much. I have a pair of Monoprice Monolith M1060s on their way from amazon right now

>>74531939
>on mobile devices
Which won't be listened to in ideal conditions anyway and will drain batteries unnecessarily.

>>74531980

i have good headphones you mongrel - my point is that you don't need to listen to fucking flac for them to be worth the money
http://www.shure.com/americas/products/headphones/srh1840-professional-open-back-headphones

>>74531927
I have some albums in 320, FLAC vinyl, and FLAC HD
There's a massive difference between all of them.

>>74532000
>never turned off vsync
I'm pretty sure I know what I'm doing bud

>cpu in your phone
Who said we're talking about using flac on mobile? Also a powerbank is a thing

>>74531993
No, you can't. Blind A/B test confirm this. The "missing" frequencies across the spectrum are overlapping. You are physiologically incapable of hearing the lower SPL simultaneously occurring frequency. You think you can because of the placebo effect, the same way that people taking sugar pills are relieved of depression symptoms when they believe themselves to be taking a SNRI. It would be funny if it wasn't so fucking sad.

>>74532027
If you're using those and can't hear the difference between 320kbps mp3 and 5mb/s flac your ears are shit and I can't help you.
>you don't need to listen to fucking flac for them to be worth the money
Sure but it certainly helps them shine.

>>74531540
depending on the recording and material u can hear the difference desu

>>74531730
>Correct.
ok bye

>>74532000
they have dedicated audio players for that, you know

>>74532013
Oooo very nice. I haven't heard that set but I do have some planars and they're fucking great.
If these are your first high end headphones you're in for a treat.

>>74532049
>I'm pretty sure I know what I'm doing bud
Coming from a guy who thinks his ears work differently than every other human being, I kinda doubt it.
>Who said we're talking about using flac on mobile?
I thought that would be clear when I said
>kills battery life on mobile devices
Giving you credit for being literate was probably a mistake on my part though, given that you're so stupid you think you can supersede human physiology.

Btw, it's exactly the same on non-mobile devices. You pay the same CPU premium, it just doesn't matter as much when you aren't on a finite power source.

>>74532105
And FLAC requires more computational resources than uncompressed or lossy formats on any CPU. You're losing battery life for a difference in quality that your ears are physiologically incapable of hearing.

>>74532118
>listening to flac = not turning off vsync
What a conclusion !

>>74532052
as i said, you can if you know what to listen for (stereo information, it's quite easy to hear with soft classical music if you focus on the stereo information of reverb). most people (also meaning most of the people who did the a/b tests) don't care though.

Takes up too much space for me, too poor to afford headphones that can actually show an audible difference between .flac and .mp3. So, I usually just convert whatever .flac's I run across to .mp3 as a result. A good amount of my music is 320kb/s, which is fine.

I think it's fine however you listen to music, so long as it's music. One day I'd love to hear some high-end headphones playing some lossless music, but that day will have to wait. I have a sub-par vinyl setup to enjoy in the meantime (but with literally eight vinyls still, but planning on getting some more sometime lol).

>>74532162
Guess we should tell all the audio hardware manufacturers to stop producing dedicated flac players

>>74532211
Fair enough. I hope you get the chance one day

But I do
I even have a lot of 24bit memes even though they sound exactly the same, but I have 10TBs of storage.

>>74532271
For 24 bit flac, you would actually need a soundcard capable of actually taking advantage of it.

>>74532027
Still don't know how you can shill against flac while having headphones like these

>>74532294
I also have that.

>>74532211
It's worth it.
Next luxury item you buy I definitely recommend some good headphones. (make sure you have enough for a DAC as well, it's just as important if not more)