The Lossless vs Lossy format thread.

low_bass_makker · 3rd March 2009, 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

You'll quickly discover that all of that terrible compression doesn't amount to much when you use your ears rathern than your eyes. MPS at 256k is fine.

I agree but there are few who cannot agree on this...and remain on the uncompressed format.

gunbir · 3rd March 2009, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

You'll quickly discover that all of that terrible compression doesn't amount to much when you use your ears rathern than your eyes. MPS at 256k is fine.

Umm... OK... If you say so Andy, if you say so...

sk456 · 3rd March 2009, 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

You'll quickly discover that all of that terrible compression doesn't amount to much when you use your ears rathern than your eyes. MPS at 256k is fine.

Hi Andy Im afraid "much" is very relative . I havnt looked at any graphs on any softwares but to me a 256 kpbs file sounds quite lame as compared to a lossless wav file.

greenhorn · 3rd March 2009, 19:41

I agree that there are differences between, say a 320k mp3 and lossless, but can you make out the difference in a car environment ( lets say a REALLY well damped car)

and more importantly, will you be able to make out the difference when you are driving?

low_bass_makker · 3rd March 2009, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenhorn

and more importantly, will you be able to make out the difference when you are driving?

Yes there are few persons who are present on the forum.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/ask-gu...s-mp3-etc.html

Read from my post (no#2)

gunbir · 3rd March 2009, 19:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenhorn

I agree that there are differences between, say a 320k mp3 and lossless, but can you make out the difference in a car environment ( lets say a REALLY well damped car)

and more importantly, will you be able to make out the difference when you are driving?

Yes,
Yes,
Yes,
Yes, and...
Yes!

scarlet.fever · 3rd March 2009, 20:00

Apologize for this I may sound a little silly considering people here know quite much.

Could somone tell me how to convert from CD to wav ?

gunbir · 3rd March 2009, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by low_bass_makker

I normal convert them to WAV from FLAC to play them in my IPOD and I like the results. Very close to the original but not perfect. And it is very much better than a MP3

Quote:

Originally Posted by low_bass_makker

I agree but there are few who cannot agree on this...and remain on the uncompressed format.

Contradicting ourselves much...???

hydrashok · 3rd March 2009, 20:09

Here we all go again

We have to do this every once in a while don't we?

@greenhorn, yes we can. Take a song that you like, one that you listen to quite often on an Audio CD in your setup. Rip it to 256kbps MP3 and listen to it on your setup. You will be able to make out the difference. The higher frequencies will sound more 'shrieky' and the bass will sound less 'rounded and full' and the vocals will also tend to be more 'shrieky'. Granted, you may be able to tell the difference only if you are listening for it, but then again you may be able to tell the difference even otherwise.

rohan_fonseca · 3rd March 2009, 21:49

Slightly OT. Would playing lossless from an ipod on my pio HU via ipod interface provide better quality than playing it via aux in?

greenhorn · 3rd March 2009, 22:12

@ hydra, I think you missed my point

1.difference between 256k and 320k CBR - obvious
2.between 320K and Lossless /CD - IF i listened carefully
3.between 320k and lossless with the engine on, in traffic , with someone else driving - Usually I find the fine difference drowned out by ambient noise
4.between 320k and lossless/CD , while i am driving- I've never even noticed. I'm way more concentrated on driving, and listening to the detail in the music takes a back seat.

Its about # 3 &4 which i was doubtful. Guess there are folks who can do both. I'm not much of a multi tasker anyway. I cant even use a cellphone when I'm driving

EDIT: pretty much what LBM posted in the other thread.

frankmehta · 3rd March 2009, 22:27

here's what I did.
i took a Fleetwood Mac Original CD (Rumours, of course). SONGS: Sara and Rhiannon and Everywhere
CONVERTED and PLAYED
1. MP3 (320 kbps) and transferred to CD.
2. MP3 (320 kbps) and transferred to iPod.
3. FLAC--->ALAC and transferred to iPod
4. The Original CD

Played all 4 in the same conditions in my system. windows up, engine off and ac off, to minimize any loss of quality due to vibrations or engine drone. ac blower in my car is loud too!

Here's my inference.
4 was the original source! so it'd better sound good. it did and how! i love this CD and its a great companion on long drives.
1. and 2. could not be distinguished from each other even though the sources were different and the file was the same. hence they will be referred to as one (1/2)
3 was the clear winner and a BIG difference was heard between 1/2 (not expected). The Midbass in 3 was much more accurate and pronounced than 1/2 and the vocals were sounding way crisper in 3. The sub was playing the right notes in 3 and somehow 1/2 sounded a little muddled.
Between 3 and 4, honestly, I couldn't make out a differrence. this could be because my system is not that high end and my ears are not very well trained.
i used an ipod to play the ALAC. the DAC of the ipod, even though inferior to the alpine DAC, exhibited no difference from the original source.
I'd say, lets end it here saying it depends on who listens to the track and in which conditions. in a normal condition, id say a 320kbps track would suffice, but if you have the option to play a FLAC/ALAC/WAV then you should grab the opportunity and try playing only these (thats if you can make out the difference)

navin · 3rd March 2009, 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Wehmeyer

a compressed version and a version that isn't compressed,..
You'll quickly discover that all of that terrible compression doesn't amount to much when you use your ears rathern than your eyes. MPS at 256k is fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunbir

Umm... OK... If you say so Andy, if you say so...

Quote:

Originally Posted by sk456

but to me a 256 kpbs file sounds quite lame as compared to a lossless wav file.

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenhorn

I agree that there are differences between, say a 320k mp3 and lossless, but can you make out the difference in a car environment ( lets say a REALLY well damped car)

I have compared MP3 and CD in my car; blind (my wife was changing the source in fact I stepped out of the car when she did and it was a sort of ABX given the fact that she did not tell me if she had actually changed the source or just got me to stop out and step in and done nothing).

This is what my ears could tell (in a car that was not moving but the engine was running - I would like to believe that my ears would have been more ciritcal if the engine was off as well and my stereo was of better quality like Gunbir's, LBM's, Bhagwan's etc..).

[b]There was an immediate and noticeable difference between LAME APE VBR (ABR of 224kbps) and CD.

Still in traffic, when driving while I could easily tell MP3 from CD the convienence of MP3 on my ipod (with ID3 tags) outweighs the differences for all but ciritcal listening.

USB for c2XX, e2XX, M:Robe 100, H10, iPod 4G, Mini, Mini 2G, Nano, Color & Video
Now with RockBox support for the atleast the ipdo video (most of my ipods are 80GB ipod videos) it would interesting to compare Wavpack lossless to CD.

ipod 6th gen owners however are never gonna get lossless support (other than apple lossless).
iPod Classic and iPod Nano 3G

Quote:

Originally Posted by rohan_fonseca

Slightly OT. Would playing lossless from an ipod on my pio HU via ipod interface provide better quality than playing it via aux in?

the ipod interface allows your HU to control the ipod. if you are using the line out of the ipod the quality should not be very different but I would use teh ipod interface becuase it is there for that reason.

navin · 3rd March 2009, 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankmehta

3 was the clear winner and a BIG difference was heard between 1/2
Between 3 and 4, honestly, I couldn't make out a differrence.

agreed there is a bigger difference between MP3 (256/320) and lossless than between lossless and the original CD. On my PC based system I have noticed this too.

I assume Apple Lossless might be the best ipod compatible format out there (does Apple Lossless support ID3 tags yet? Last I heard it had only MPEG4 tag support and few HUs have MPEG4 tag support) but without ID3 tags and a huge collection I'd get lost so I still use MP3s in the car.

abhibh · 3rd March 2009, 23:09

Guys as i said earlier. It depends upon person to person. Some people like the boosted frequencies of MP3's.

Even I used to think that anything above 192 KBPS will sound good in car and mind it, it did till the day i first got components in front.

Now most of the latest music i have are MP3's and they do sound good. But when i convert my ACD's to MP3 over a period of time of listening to same tracks again and again i can tell the difference whether its an MP3 or ACD. Heck i can even tell the difference between my MP3's (320) and WMA's (VBR 240-355kbps) ripped from same Audio CD.

WMA VBR anyday sounds better to me than MP3 (320).

P.S. I can still enjoy the music even with 128 kbps MP3.

3rd March 2009, 19:41	#19
greenhorn Senior - BHPian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: KL-01 Posts: 7,745 Thanked: 4,402 Times View My Garage	I agree that there are differences between, say a 320k mp3 and lossless, but can you make out the difference in a car environment ( lets say a REALLY well damped car) and more importantly, will you be able to make out the difference when you are driving?
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 20:00	#22
scarlet.fever BANNED Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New Delhi/Gurgaon Posts: 235 Thanked: 30 Times	Apologize for this I may sound a little silly considering people here know quite much. Could somone tell me how to convert from CD to wav ?
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 20:09	#24
hydrashok Senior - BHPian Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: In my Office Posts: 2,528 Thanked: 17 Times View My Garage	Here we all go again We have to do this every once in a while don't we? @greenhorn, yes we can. Take a song that you like, one that you listen to quite often on an Audio CD in your setup. Rip it to 256kbps MP3 and listen to it on your setup. You will be able to make out the difference. The higher frequencies will sound more 'shrieky' and the bass will sound less 'rounded and full' and the vocals will also tend to be more 'shrieky'. Granted, you may be able to tell the difference only if you are listening for it, but then again you may be able to tell the difference even otherwise.
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 21:49	#25
rohan_fonseca BHPian Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Panaji Posts: 984 Thanked: 8 Times View My Garage	Slightly OT. Would playing lossless from an ipod on my pio HU via ipod interface provide better quality than playing it via aux in?
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 22:12	#26
greenhorn Senior - BHPian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: KL-01 Posts: 7,745 Thanked: 4,402 Times View My Garage	@ hydra, I think you missed my point 1.difference between 256k and 320k CBR - obvious 2.between 320K and Lossless /CD - IF i listened carefully 3.between 320k and lossless with the engine on, in traffic , with someone else driving - Usually I find the fine difference drowned out by ambient noise 4.between 320k and lossless/CD , while i am driving- I've never even noticed. I'm way more concentrated on driving, and listening to the detail in the music takes a back seat. Its about # 3 &4 which i was doubtful. Guess there are folks who can do both. I'm not much of a multi tasker anyway. I cant even use a cellphone when I'm driving EDIT: pretty much what LBM posted in the other thread. Last edited by greenhorn : 3rd March 2009 at 22:16.
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 22:27	#27
frankmehta Senior - BHPian Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mumbai Posts: 4,000 Thanked: 3,577 Times View My Garage	here's what I did. i took a Fleetwood Mac Original CD (Rumours, of course). SONGS: Sara and Rhiannon and Everywhere CONVERTED and PLAYED 1. MP3 (320 kbps) and transferred to CD. 2. MP3 (320 kbps) and transferred to iPod. 3. FLAC--->ALAC and transferred to iPod 4. The Original CD Played all 4 in the same conditions in my system. windows up, engine off and ac off, to minimize any loss of quality due to vibrations or engine drone. ac blower in my car is loud too! Here's my inference. 4 was the original source! so it'd better sound good. it did and how! i love this CD and its a great companion on long drives. 1. and 2. could not be distinguished from each other even though the sources were different and the file was the same. hence they will be referred to as one (1/2) 3 was the clear winner and a BIG difference was heard between 1/2 (not expected). The Midbass in 3 was much more accurate and pronounced than 1/2 and the vocals were sounding way crisper in 3. The sub was playing the right notes in 3 and somehow 1/2 sounded a little muddled. Between 3 and 4, honestly, I couldn't make out a differrence. this could be because my system is not that high end and my ears are not very well trained. i used an ipod to play the ALAC. the DAC of the ipod, even though inferior to the alpine DAC, exhibited no difference from the original source. I'd say, lets end it here saying it depends on who listens to the track and in which conditions. in a normal condition, id say a 320kbps track would suffice, but if you have the option to play a FLAC/ALAC/WAV then you should grab the opportunity and try playing only these (thats if you can make out the difference)
	() Thanks

3rd March 2009, 23:09	#30
abhibh Senior - BHPian Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Back in the HOOD near you! Posts: 2,768 Thanked: 39 Times	Guys as i said earlier. It depends upon person to person. Some people like the boosted frequencies of MP3's. Even I used to think that anything above 192 KBPS will sound good in car and mind it, it did till the day i first got components in front. Now most of the latest music i have are MP3's and they do sound good. But when i convert my ACD's to MP3 over a period of time of listening to same tracks again and again i can tell the difference whether its an MP3 or ACD. Heck i can even tell the difference between my MP3's (320) and WMA's (VBR 240-355kbps) ripped from same Audio CD. WMA VBR anyday sounds better to me than MP3 (320). P.S. I can still enjoy the music even with 128 kbps MP3.
	() Thanks