Gizmodo: Lossless audio does not sound better than mp3

[GeorgeWalk]

The comments are interesting, also.

Lossless Audio Does Not Sound Better Than MP3

Audiophiles swear lossless music sounds richer than MP3, but most people don't hear a difference at all.

gizmodo.com

 

[Talisman]

The comments are interesting, also.

Lossless Audio Does Not Sound Better Than MP3

Audiophiles swear lossless music sounds richer than MP3, but most people don't hear a difference at all.

gizmodo.com

The title is clickbait, as almost always, but the article says something quite acceptable, namely that a good mp3 will be indistinguishable to the vast majority of users not trained to recognize compression artefacts, and that any search for these micro-details is not part of more in listening to music but in an exercise.
Personally I don't recognize a 256kb/s mp3 from a flac, but I don't even recognize a song played via cable from one played in Bluetooth LDAC, and probably (but I've never tried) not even with a less noble protocol.
For this reason I keep the files in flac, to still have an intact file, but I don't have any problems playing via Bluetooth

 

[Vincent Kars]

Apple and Amazon’s “Lossless Audio” is actually compressed as well. The files they use are called ALAC or FLAC files, and they’re better quality than MP3 but are slightly larger files. When they’re played back, an algorithm returns the file to its original size to play at “full quality.” But mind you, all of these quality changes are imperceivable to average listeners.

Quality changes due to ALAC and FLAC! Glad they are imperceivable

 

[Palladium]

Quality changes due to ALAC and FLAC! Glad they are imperceivable

Reminds me of that UK listening study where CD masquerading as LP was preferred over actual LP, but the real shocker was 192kbps MP3 was rated the highest amongst all under blind conditions.

 

[EERecordist]

The Gizmodo data is not a controlled study.

Jonathan Berger at Stanford has been doing studies for many years.

This article in 2010 offers some hope: https://seanolive.blogspot.com/2010/06/some-new-evidence-that-generation-y.html

 

[sergeauckland]

I don't know why this surprises anybody. It's been very well established that MP3 at the higher data rates, like 256k or 320k are transparent to pretty much all listeners, whilst even lower rates like 192k are transparent to most.

I listen a lot to Venice Classic radio which goes out a 128k MP3, and don't find anything lacking in the absence of a direct AB comparison.

BBC radio at 320k AAC and Spotify at 320k Ogg Vorbis are both equally fully satisfactory.

I wish the 'Golden Ears' brigade would just get over themselves.

There's a limit to human hearing!!!

S.

 

[DVDdoug]

Dolby digital* (and DTS) is also lossy. I didn't realize that when I got my 1st DVD player and I might have still had a bad impression of MP3 at that time... Probably most of us have heard low-quality, low-bitrate MP3s.

Some of the "best" and most enjoyable music I own is 5.1 channel concert DVDs! There is often a lossless stereo LPCM track but I'll l always choose the (lossy) surround!

* Dolby TrueHD (on Blu-ray) is lossless. There is also a lossless Blu-Ray version of DTS.

 

[Keith_W]

Interestingly, I had a conversation with a friend about this.

Him: why don't you use Spotify?
Me: because there is no lossless tier available.
Him: You know that you are unlikely to hear a difference between lossy and lossless audio, right?
Me: You can't hear a difference between high SINAD and low SINAD DAC's either. You chose your DAC because of its low SINAD, didn't you.
Him: Touche.

 

[deweydm]

Interestingly, I had a conversation with a friend about this.

Him: why don't you use Spotify?
Me: because there is no lossless tier available.
Him: You know that you are unlikely to hear a difference between lossy and lossless audio, right?
Me: You can't hear a difference between high SINAD and low SINAD DAC's either. You chose your DAC because of its low SINAD, didn't you.
Him: Touche.

There’s something to be said for not having to worry about it. Let’s see, I can conduct a fun little ABX experiment to see if I can hear a difference, or just go with lossless and move on with my life.

 

[sergeauckland]

Interestingly, I had a conversation with a friend about this.

Him: why don't you use Spotify?
Me: because there is no lossless tier available.
Him: You know that you are unlikely to hear a difference between lossy and lossless audio, right?
Me: You can't hear a difference between high SINAD and low SINAD DAC's either. You chose your DAC because of its low SINAD, didn't you.
Him: Touche.

I think this is the nub of the problem. Perception over reality. We buy high SINAD products because we can, not because they're necessary. I'm objectively happy with a system with a SINAD of -60dB, but subjectively I wouldn't consciously buy one that 'only' had that.
Why?

S

 

[Timcognito]

There’s something to be said for not having to worry about it. Let’s see, I can conduct a fun little ABX experiment to see if I can hear a difference, or just go with lossless and move on with my life.

If its music, use headphones to block extraneous noise and small combo or solo acoustic music by labels like Telarc, RM, Chesky, Sheffield Labs, Water Lilly. I bet you will hear a subtle difference as most quality comes from the recording on the front end and little from the playback.