• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Is lossy outdated in 2019 & onwards?

Joined
Aug 28, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
7
I'm starting to wonder if HA is fudging results on Apple AAC & Vorbis transparency because V5 Lame sounds better to me than they do at 96 ~ 128kbps with ambient music?. No idea why places like Reddit take them seriously when a user on Doom9 found they were binning results that painted Nero AAC in a good light. Like getting 5's on all samples.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
1,377
Likes
1,390
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I'm starting to wonder if HA is fudging results on Apple AAC & Vorbis transparency because V5 Lame sounds better to me than they do at 96 ~ 128kbps with ambient music?.
So you trust your subjective perception more than their results?
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
1
Yes they've been outdated since 2010 outside bandwidth limited cases. The issue i have is that struggle with complex music with revealing headphones or speakers. I gave up when i could ABX Lull's continue and need a bit rate of 170kbps to stop the ringing artifacts.
 

MRC01

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
932
Likes
861
Location
Pacific Northwest
Yes they've been outdated since 2010 outside bandwidth limited cases. The issue i have is that struggle with complex music with revealing headphones or speakers. I gave up when i could ABX Lull's continue and need a bit rate of 170kbps to stop the ringing artifacts.
With MP3, VBR is the way to go. It will use up to 320k but only if needed. LAME VBR quality 3 on full bandwidth complex music (worst-case scenario) averages around 175 kbps (higher when needed, lower where it can) and is about 5:1 smaller than the original WAV file. That 5:1 ratio can be useful when storage is limited, like on phones, and more than twice better compression than FLAC.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
1,377
Likes
1,390
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
With MP3, VBR is the way to go. It will use up to 320k but only if needed. LAME VBR quality 3 on full bandwidth complex music (worst-case scenario) averages around 175 kbps (higher when needed, lower where it can) and is about 5:1 smaller than the original WAV file. That 5:1 ratio can be useful when storage is limited, like on phones, and more than twice better compression than FLAC.
There are of course lossy encodings that are better than mp3.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
1
With MP3, VBR is the way to go. It will use up to 320k but only if needed. LAME VBR quality 3 on full bandwidth complex music (worst-case scenario) averages around 175 kbps (higher when needed, lower where it can) and is about 5:1 smaller than the original WAV file. That 5:1 ratio can be useful when storage is limited, like on phones, and more than twice better compression than FLAC.
That was AAC i was talking about. MP3 is pretty weak to my ears i can tell V4 - V0 on some samples, Even on 320kbps with prurient history of aids first track there a click that sounds wrong vs the lossless one.
 

MRC01

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
932
Likes
861
Location
Pacific Northwest
Sure, MP3 is not the best. But the point is, whatever you're using, even if it takes 200 kbps to make it transparent enough, that's still more than 5:1 compression from the original and less than half the space FLAC would take. Doesn't matter on a PC, but it can matter on a phone. And listening on earbuds or in a car, it's easier to get "transparent enough".
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
1
Sure, MP3 is not the best. But the point is, whatever you're using, even if it takes 200 kbps to make it transparent enough, that's still more than 5:1 compression from the original and less than half the space FLAC would take. Doesn't matter on a PC, but it can matter on a phone. And listening on earbuds or in a car, it's easier to get "transparent enough".
I get that but i have 256GB+ memory card which is why i went FLAC.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
1
I don't use lossy since not even 256kbps enough for me on my collection, Even Opus sounds bad on 1 album. I can't stand the ringing/pixel artifact AAC gives or the fuzzy distortion MP3 gives on demanding stuff. Opus/Musepack have barely no support so no point chasing them.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
1,377
Likes
1,390
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I don't use lossy since not even 256kbps enough for me on my collection, Even Opus sounds bad on 1 album. I can't stand the ringing/pixel artifact AAC gives or the fuzzy distortion MP3 gives on demanding stuff. Opus/Musepack have barely no support so no point chasing them.
Would love to see your ABX logs.
 

Robin L

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
619
Likes
530
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
I've got a dirt-cheap [Fiio M3K, $69] DAP loaded with 500gb of, mostly, lossless files. I can hear the difference on the few lossy files in on the micro sd. I don't want Lossy files.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
1,377
Likes
1,390
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I can hear the difference on the few lossy files in on the micro sd. I don't want Lossy files.
There is lossy and there is lossy. I am sure you hear a difference with 64 kbps files done with an old encoder. 320 k AAC or Opus is a different story...
 

Robin L

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
619
Likes
530
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
There is lossy and there is lossy. I am sure you hear a difference with 64 kbps files done with an old encoder. 320 k AAC or Opus is a different story...
Had a subscription to Amazon Prime Music. I don't know what Amazon Prime is pumping out, but when I had a CD [or an Apple Lossless of the same] to compare to a Prime music file, the lossless file would be better. It happens often enough on more than enough streams that I don't bother, even though I have the means.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
1,377
Likes
1,390
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Had a subscription to Amazon Prime Music. I don't know what Amazon Prime is pumping out, but when I had a CD [or an Apple Lossless of the same] to compare to a Prime music file, the lossless file would be better. It happens often enough on more than enough streams that I don't bother, even though I have the means.
Did you do a double-blind ABX? How did you match levels?
 

BDWoody

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
1,895
Likes
3,397
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Are you always like this?
He's just trying to save you money and stress...

If you are interested in learning more about why your impressions may not be reliable, feel free to explore why all these people are challenging your impressions...

The secret is the brain plays lots of tricks...we are all susceptible...don't take offense.

Cheers.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
12
Likes
1
Are you always like this?
Same here I'm getting fed up with him nagging DBT stuff when even quite few science areas admit its flawed. Pretty silly when I'm talking about avant garde artists like Merzbow. Like here on this video.

 

BDWoody

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
1,895
Likes
3,397
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Same here I'm getting fed up with him nagging DBT stuff when even quite few science areas admit its flawed.
What science areas?

And, it's usually just blind testing being requested, not double blind.

This is a science site after all...don't get angry when people are asked to back up what are typically very strident and 'night and day differences' types of subjective posts, with no attempt to control anything.
 
Top Bottom