HD Flac vs MP3

[Rude]

So Im dowloading this Betty Board DSO show https://archive.org/details/DSO-2013-10-12

 

I notice that Rob put up a 24 bit flac which I think is the HD flac that some of the bands on nugs now offer.  It is a massive file size--some songs upwards of 300megs.  The whole show looks to be about 5gigs in that 24 bit flac format.  Is this really that much better?  Are my ears gonna bleed as I experience this perfect sound? I see it marketed as high def.  I consider myself a semi audiophile as I pieced together a nice system and really prefer listening to shows than tv.  Im going to test it tonight with the 24 bit vs the mp3 and see if there is a noticeable difference.  I admit that I see little difference in the flac and 320 mp3's so usually buy the mp3 version of shows, but most of my dead shows are flac files.

[Cosmic Mike]

It seems like you already answered your own question. I've researched this before in my life. Hard to really tell the difference between loseless(flac) and 320kbps MP3 files. From what I understand, the right equipment and a discerning ear would give you the ability to tell the difference. If I were to be tested blindly on which is MP3 and which is FLAC I would assuredly fail. I personally save both file formats if I can. Computer storage is incredibly cheap nowadays, so fuck it. In the American spirit, own as much shit as you possibly can.

[found]

I honestly can't tell much of a difference listening to FLAC and 320 MP3. Like CM said, i guess if you have a really high end stereo it could be noticeable. I personally just save all my GD files as 320 when i can. I'd rather save the space on my hard drive than have a file that could potentially sound better. 320 MP3 is the way to go, in my opinion.

[Rude]

Ok so listening to the even higher def flac 24 vs 320k mp3 I can tell no difference at all and I have a nice system. And 5gigs is a ton of space

[GoingBackTo Where....]

Mp3's breakdown overtime...and music distortion begins. Flac...eliminated that problem.

I think:)

[Tea]

Mp3's breakdown overtime...and music distortion begins. Flac...eliminated that problem.

I think:)

Isn't that only if they're copied? In the interest of full disclosure, An audiophile I am not.

[GoingBackTo Where....]

FLAC is better than MP3 simply because it is lossless. Some peoples state that they don't hear any difference between FLAC and high bitrate MP3 files. It's true for most people who don't use professional music equipment. With any pair of decent headphones you can easily tell the difference between a 128kbps and FLAC. Between 320kbps MP3's and FLAC's, the difference is more subtle, but still very much existent, especially when it comes to a good number of instruments playing at the same time, and a 320kbps MP3 encode suddenly sounds "crowded". This difference is incredibly noticeable with metal songs that rely heavily on cymbals for example, where they are always washed away by other instruments in crappy encodes. (this was copied and pasted from a goggle search)

 

Music as complicated as DSO, and the meaningful experiences we enjoy on just subtle changes to the songs we have listened to for decades does and should be mastered digitally with FLAC.   Obviously if you want to make recordings!!!

 

Furthur-- higher bit rate means more information to your system which means much more clarity in over all sound.

 

The same can be compared to jpegs and tiff----------I think........I know a little bit about everything, and not much about anything:}!!!!!!

 

I must admit though------I used to jam, love, and reveal in some old taped GD bootlegs.  The sound sucked, hissy, audience made it worse, but it was my first link to this love, so I still have a piece of heart for distorted GD.   Like old 20's recordings....the imperfections bring on nostalgic thoughts and feelings:}!!!!!

[gr8fulpair]

FLAC is better than MP3 simply because it is lossless. Some peoples state that they don't hear any difference between FLAC and high bitrate MP3 files. It's true for most people who don't use professional music equipment. With any pair of decent headphones you can easily tell the difference between a 128kbps and FLAC. Between 320kbps MP3's and FLAC's, the difference is more subtle, but still very much existent, especially when it comes to a good number of instruments playing at the same time, and a 320kbps MP3 encode suddenly sounds "crowded". This difference is incredibly noticeable with metal songs that rely heavily on cymbals for example, where they are always washed away by other instruments in crappy encodes. (this was copied and pasted from a goggle search)

Music as complicated as DSO, and the meaningful experiences we enjoy on just subtle changes to the songs we have listened to for decades does and should be mastered digitally with FLAC. Obviously if you want to make recordings!!!

Furthur-- higher bit rate means more information to your system which means much more clarity in over all sound.

The same can be compared to jpegs and tiff----------I think........I know a little bit about everything, and not much about anything:}!!!!!!

I must admit though------I used to jam, love, and reveal in some old taped GD bootlegs. The sound sucked, hissy, audience made it worse, but it was my first link to this love, so I still have a piece of heart for distorted GD. Like old 20's recordings....the imperfections bring on nostalgic thoughts and feelings:}!!!!!

Damn Sunny, easy on those few remaining brain cells....

[cm_hayden]

Have to agree with sun1869, on a good to high end system I can easily tell the difference. When it's all available or being offered I will download a mp3 for my car stereo.

[John A]

The horror of MP3 (and lossless compression as a whole) is that in this era of increased technology we are using this technology to actually decrease fidelity.  Rob Eaton and his ilk work with 24-bit depth for a reason - because it sounds better.  And what are we after here, if not that?    I don't want to speak for Rob, but I'm guessing he'd cringe at the thought of purposeful dumbing down of the sound he worked so dutifully to create. 

 

That said, MP3s at the relatively high bit rates being discussed here (i.e. upwards of 300kb/sec) are fine for typical car and iPod type applications.  But to take music you love and ONLY own it in compressed fashion is, IMHO, a disservice.  It isn't like the cost of large hard drives breaks the bank these days.  I guess one could argue that if, later on, they find themselves with a reference audio rig, they could simply get the material again in a full fidelity format.  But my thought process was always just the opposite; spend the resources to get the best source material possible, and as I acquired better and better playback gear it would already be there. 

 

I'll also say this to all the lossy converts:  you are reaping the rewards of the folks who, back in the day, spent their money on mics, pre-amps, digital recording rigs, and the like, rather than amps and speakers.

Then again, I get a little obsessive with all this shit...I don't even like the thought of my 48kHz masters down sampled to 44.1!

 

And Tea, what you're referring to is called "cascading" - when you re-encode an already compressed file it really starts to mess it up.

[found]

Where I'm from, we call it going down a generation

[GoingBackTo Where....]

MP3's if I am not wrong....were created to compress musical data.   This was because, back in the day........memory was expensive.  However, there is this thing called Moore's law, and it has proved very true!!!

 

Thus, digital music now a days does not need compression, just expression:}!!!!!!

 

Besides, would you not want a master quality disc?  

 

And I DO TAKE NOTE:}!!!!!    My dendratic web is well connected, and my neurons fire as fast if not faster than many others, naturally:}!!!!

 

I am used to being teased, I leave myself open for it, as I tease others.  Will Rogers once said, "I never teased a person I did not like"!!!

 

However, don't be hating me on a cellular level!!!!    I can take hits, but leave my cells out of it!!!!:}

 

I have heard such things before, and my usual response, I have killed more brain cells than you ever had:}!!!!!!!  Think I said this to my 7th grade teacher for the first time:}   Honestly!!!! 

 

bla bla bla...........when you get a chance, always get the better quality.....this goes for tools, appliances and women:}!!!!!!!!  

 

For DSO or GD, its a no brainer!!!!!!!

 

 

Sorry---but get it?  No brainer...Chris......hahaha!!!!!

 

Its nice to be back home with the kids:}!!!!!!!

[gr8fulpair]

MP3's if I am not wrong....were created to compress musical data.   This was because, back in the day........memory was expensive.  However, there is this thing called Moore's law, and it has proved very true!!!

 

Thus, digital music now a days does not need compression, just expression:}!!!!!!

 

Besides, would you not want a master quality disc?  

 

And I DO TAKE NOTE:}!!!!!    My dendratic web is well connected, and my neurons fire as fast if not faster than many others, naturally:}!!!!

 

I am used to being teased, I leave myself open for it, as I tease others.  Will Rogers once said, "I never teased a person I did not like"!!!

 

However, don't be hating me on a cellular level!!!!    I can take hits, but leave my cells out of it!!!!:}

 

I have heard such things before, and my usual response, I have killed more brain cells than you ever had:}!!!!!!!  Think I said this to my 7th grade teacher for the first time:}   Honestly!!!! 

 

bla bla bla...........when you get a chance, always get the better quality.....this goes for tools, appliances and women:}!!!!!!!!  

 

For DSO or GD, its a no brainer!!!!!!!

 

 

Sorry---but get it?  No brainer...Chris......hahaha!!!!!

 

Its nice to be back home with the kids:}!!!!!!!

Hey I love you brother. What ever you say goes. Long as I got my groove on, no complaining.