REVscene Automotive Forum

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)
-   Gaming, Computer Tech & Electronics (https://www.revscene.net/forums/gaming-computer-tech-electronics_32/)
-   -   320 vs flac (https://www.revscene.net/forums/603133-320-vs-flac.html)

RenoMan 01-18-2010 04:28 PM

320 vs flac
 
Is it worth having flac stored in hdd. Sometimes i cant tell the difference between the two and with my approx 15,000 music files in 320 it just doesnt seem worthwhile to store flac.

Is it really something worthwhile ?

Am i missing a lot not listening to flac?

Ulic Qel-Droma 01-18-2010 05:00 PM

if you have to ask, then it's not worth it for you. most people wont be able to tell the diff between 320 and FLAC

RenoMan 01-18-2010 05:09 PM

A better sound system would be benificial listening to flac?

Razor Ramon HG 01-18-2010 05:27 PM

Keep FLAC for archival purposes. That's what I do. I have well over 130GB of music encoded in Apple Lossless, and it's ideal if I want to transcode it into other formats or bitrates later on. Transcoding from lossy to anything is always a big no-no due to loss of sound quality.

And it also depends on your equipment. You shouldn't really notice a difference from say 128kbps than 256kbps if you have shitty $5 buds.

I have a Cowon S9 + UE triple.fi's (both of which are one of the highest ranking in their respective classes; DAP/universal IEMs), and I can't really notice a difference besides 320kbps and lossless. However, I just keep a lossless copy just incase because of the reasons mentioned above.

asian_XL 01-18-2010 07:21 PM

unless the album is really good, otherwise, I won't save a file higher than 192kps

CorneringArtist 01-18-2010 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asian_XL (Post 6776567)
unless the album is really good, otherwise, I won't save a file higher than 192kps

+1. I also do it since 320kps files are a bit of space on my Zune (I only have a 4GB), and space is at a premium. I used to use 128kps, but even with 15-dollar Sony earbuds, I noticed the difference between 128 and 192.

woob 01-19-2010 12:18 AM

I personally can't tell the difference between 320 and FLAC. I've downloaded FLAC versions of big albums e.g. Beatles 2009 Remasters (in stereo and mono) but most of the music on my computer (probably 90% of my collection) is V0

bcedhk 01-19-2010 12:23 AM

i think FLAC is benificial for older music. I have a collection of Eric's Clapton in FLAC and i can def tell a difference in his live disc compare to 320.


I run a DAC , tube amp and headphones.. with FLAC the background noise and instrument sound more lively compare to 320... but again, everyone's hearing is different and subjective.

If it is for just regular playing outdoors, just use 320... if it is for @ home quiet listening time, I would run FLAC :)

yuusha 01-19-2010 01:17 AM

I can tell between 128 and 192kbps, but the line blurs at 160 and higher for me. I find a lot of 320kbps or VBR stuff.

If it's just for portable listening, don't bother with FLAC.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net