FLAC vs MP3 320

>>74968311
Flac is for gays

>>74968311
tin can with string attached to another guys anal tubing

is that what you were asking anon?

There is literally no reason to use lossy formats in 2017.
Not going to vote in your gay litte poll.

>>74968347
what's the bitrate?

>>74968391
249fps
TOP TIER SHIT ANON

Notice, as in hear? No.
Can I see it? It's a matter of looking at the frequency output in iZotope.
What I'm really after is Dynamics. It just so happens that a lot of material I buy on rutracker is in FLAC.

>>74968566
>buy

File: FGTH-BBB-promo-poster.jpg (157KB, 640x956px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 640x956px

>>74968614
> he doesn't buy music on torrent trackers

It doesn't matter if you hear the difference. Eventually MP3 will be unsupported and you'll need to convert to another format, like AAC. That's a lossy conversion, and you lose quality.

With FLAC you keep a lossless archival master, and can convert to MP3 or AAC or Ogg or any future format without losing quality. When FLAC loses support, you can do a lossless conversion to whatever future lossless format exists.

tl;dr archive your music as FLAC and convert it to AAC or whatever for your phond

>>74968912
can you reccomend me a good converter? (flac to mp3)

File: sammy.jpg (76KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1280x720px

flac is literally for autists. music is better when it sounds worse.

>>74968912
lol faggot just download it again in flac of soulseek if you have to, it isn't that hard

File: jonny_greenwood.jpg (20KB, 398x400px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 398x400px

"We had a few complaints that the MP3s of our last record wasn't encoded at a high enough rate. Some even suggested we should have used FLACs, but if you even know what one of those is, and have strong opinions on them, you're already lost to the world of high fidelity and have probably spent far too much money on your speaker-stands." - Jonny Greenwood


Audiophiles BTFO

>>74968957
Doesn't really matter they all use the same lame encoder (that is the name not a comment on its quality).

File: photo.jpg (125KB, 957x466px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 957x466px

>>74968957
foobar is great, comes with splitter/converter out of the box
Pic related: converting a SACD DSD ISO to 128 kbps mp3 :^)

>>74968977
>all music will be forever widely available in FLAC
yeah okay
>>74968979
>releases In Rainbows on vinyl anyway

On most sound systems you can't realistically hear the difference between FLAC and MP3 320.
It's only worth it if you've dropped at least a solid grand on speakers or headphones. It's the only reason you would in the first place, really.

>>74969112
On the other hand, if both are available, you might as well use the archival one (assuming you have plenty of storage space, which is trivially cheap these days)

For a phone, always MP3 or AAC, just because it's smaller (and you shouldn't be relying on your phone as an archive)

Hearing the difference now isn't the reason to encode to FLAC. FLAC uses lossless compression, while MP3 is 'lossy'. What this means is that for each year the MP3 sits on your hard drive, it will lose roughly 12kbps, assuming you have SATA - it's about 15kbps on IDE, but only 7kbps on SCSI, due to rotational velocidensity. You don't want to know how much worse it is on CD-ROM or other optical media.

I started collecting MP3s in about 2001, and if I try to play any of the tracks I downloaded back then, even the stuff I grabbed at 320kbps, they just sound like crap. The bass is terrible, the midrange…well don’t get me started. Some of those albums have degraded down to 32 or even 16kbps. FLAC rips from the same period still sound great, even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place. Seriously, stick to FLAC, you may not be able to hear the difference now, but in a year or two, you’ll be glad you did.

File: the question dog.jpg (59KB, 408x439px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 408x439px

>>74969292
What the fuck? Source?

>>74969292

>even if they weren’t stored correctly, in a cool, dry place.

>>74969666
Are you stupid or something?

>>74969666
if this is someone pretending to fall for the bait he is doing an amazing job, the evil trip of satan is like the icing on the cake

V0 dumb faggots

Ogg Vorbis dumb faggots

>there is still no explanation as to why youtube uploads sound better than flac and 320 mp3

File: 1449355621735.jpg (28KB, 510x342px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 510x342px

You plebs probably can't hear the difference because you're not running audiophile crystals.

>>74970062
>tfw I can't tell if this shit is serious or not

File: 1342906677004.jpg (15KB, 373x359px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 373x359px

Why do you dumbasses make such a big deal about bitrate when finding the best mastering of a release is way more important? A 128kbps mp3 taken from a dynamic, well mastered source is still better than a 24bit/96khz FLAC from some brickwalled loudness war piece of garbage. And you're also a retard if you use 320 instead of V0.

This is fucking embarrassing

>>74968311
It's not a matter of opinion. Go ahead and prove yourself wrong if you're convinced you can hear a difference:
http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

Simple.I listen to my music half the time through a bluetooth stereo speaker and FLAC chokes the connection while 320 MP3 doesn't.

>>74969292
Why do people still respond to this stupid copypasta?

>>74970779
I saw the Pope at a grocery store in Los Angeles yesterday. I told him how cool it was to meet him in person, but I didn’t want to be a douche and bother him and ask him for photos or anything.
He said, “Oh, like you’re doing now?”
I was taken aback, and all I could say was “Huh?” but he kept cutting me off and going “huh? huh? huh?” and closing his hand shut in front of my face. I walked away and continued with my shopping, and I heard him chuckle as I walked off. When I came to pay for my stuff up front I saw him trying to walk out the doors with like fifteen Milky Ways in his hands without paying.
The girl at the counter was very nice about it and professional, and was like “Sir, you need to pay for those first.” At first he kept pretending to be tired and not hear her, but eventually turned back around and brought them to the counter.
When she took one of the bars and started scanning it multiple times, he stopped her and told her to scan them each individually “to prevent any electrical infetterence,” and then turned around and winked at me. I don’t even think that’s a word. After she scanned each bar and put them in a bag and started to say the price, he kept interrupting her by yawning really loudly.

>>74968912
>every person has to archive all his music
sounds inefficient

in order to firmly settle my opinion, last christmas I did multiple comparison tests using my drummer uncle's high end studio headphones and expensive ass amp. I couldn't tell the difference personally. I don't have ears trained for this kind of stuff though, so maybe there's some small difference i missed.

one thing for sure - it's not noticeable enough to be an elitist fucktard about

File: prettyok.png (43KB, 360x785px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 360x785px

>>74970474
I have a usb 3.0 gayman keyboard plugged directly into my PC with an audio jack output on the keyboard that I plug my headphones into.

If I were to buy a soundcard and plug my headset directly into it, how much better do you think my score could be?

I just did an ABX and got 13/16 correct

>people STILL insisting it's about the sound

>>74970062
>>74970092
>someone took the time out of their day to make this picture by scotch taping some rocks to their cables

>>74972230
Those irregular shaped pebbles absorb all the bad frequencies and leave you with only good sounds.

What file format are apple music songs in? Because I stream all my music now, and so should all of you, it's fucking 2017 come on.

>>74972259
>C U R R E N T
>Y E A R

>>74972251
Pathetic honestly you don't even know what you're memeing.
Audiophiles aren't looking for the best sound, they're looking for the most accurate sound reproduction.
Using $10 sony iems at the moment btw.

>>74972269
Really, why hurt the environment by downloading songs and keeping them on your hard drive? I'm streaming blond by franke ocean right now and it sounds great.

>>74972287
>Audiophiles aren't looking for the best sound
>using $10 sony items
Is that your expert opinion?

>>74970229
This, but it's kind of funny how a lot of times it's easier to find a digital lossless file of the best version of the album than a high quality rip of the more commercial version.

V0 > FLAC > 320

>>74968311
Personally I can't tell a difference with the audio equipment I use, but I prefer to just stick with FLAC as it's an archival format.

FLAC for archiving, home stereo and MP3 lame V0 for mobile. Personally I only use FLAC. This signal chain: FLAC file Compression level 5> 128gbmicrosd/Fiio X3ii> ATH-M50. Simple and great listening experience!

lmaoing at all the plebs who listen to their music with shitty apple headphones and think they can argue about flacs. If your headphones cost less than 400$ you are not capable to hold an argument about bitrate you fag.

>>74974241
>needing to spend 2000$ to enjoy music