• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

What lossy codec do you use

Purplefuzz256

Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2019
Messages
6
Likes
0
Only have 64GB + 16gb on my Sony AW45. I just use Lame at V2 since it does better on some samples than QAAC does?.
 

charleski

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
1,098
Likes
2,239
Location
Manchester UK
Only have 64GB + 16gb on my Sony AW45. I just use Lame at V2 since it does better on some samples than QAAC does?.
Interesting. I used to use Lame -V2 but switched to qaac tvbr mode (q 90 or 100) some years ago after reading the shootouts on hydrogenaudio (though these only really showed a difference at lower bit rates). I switched from mp3 largely so I wouldn’t have to worry about the sfb21 problem (though this is probably not an issue with my aging ears). Do you have a link that talks about the problems with qaac?

I can fit my collection into a 256Gib sd card. FLAC would be at least 4 times the size, which is outside my budget.

One minor annoyance is the need to dither any high-res files I get before conversion, as the qaac encoder just seems to truncate at 16bits. I did some tests a few years ago and found that simple TPDF seemed to work best without any noise-shaping.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Messages
37
Likes
21
Interesting. I used to use Lame -V2 but switched to qaac tvbr mode (q 90 or 100) some years ago after reading the shootouts on hydrogenaudio (though these only really showed a difference at lower bit rates). I switched from mp3 largely so I wouldn’t have to worry about the sfb21 problem (though this is probably not an issue with my aging ears). Do you have a link that talks about the problems with qaac?

AAC with QAAC/FHG sound way better than Lame <192kb/s. There are samples with MP3 were the bit rate can shoot to 235 - 320kb/s or gives up sounding tranparent, which is why i moved to AAC. Opus is better but there little support for that and AAC is near MP3 level when it comes to support. lol

There really no point on MP3 unless your stuck with a old DAP that only supports MP3 only.
 

digitalfrost

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
1,521
Likes
3,086
Location
Palatinate, Germany
AAC with QAAC/FHG sound way better than Lame <192kb/s. There are samples with MP3 were the bit rate can shoot to 235 - 320kb/s or gives up sounding tranparent, which is why i moved to AAC. Opus is better but there little support for that and AAC is near MP3 level when it comes to support. lol

There really no point on MP3 unless your stuck with a old DAP that only supports MP3 only.
MP3 has been shown to be transparent at 128kbps 15 years ago.

https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Hydrogenaudio_Listening_Tests
 

L5730

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
669
Likes
436
Location
East of England
Phone (old non-smart):
MP3, 128-192kbps CBR LAME. The internal processing and shoddy hardware don't demonstrate any benefit to any higher quality. Plus it's limited to 99 songs and 1GiB of space.

General unknown device:
CDs, plain old CD-Rs burnt as CD-DA. Works in most cars.
MP3 192kbps CBR LAME on FAT formatted smaller USB stick. Compatibility.

Community Radio station:
MP3 192kbps CBR LAME. Size, speed to process and it simply works. It's going through further analogue processing and has to be compatible with cross platform (rules out VBR generally).

CD Player (USB):
WMA v9 CBR 320kpbs. The device doesn't support lossless or even LPCM .WAV. MP3 sounds clearly sub-par, as does WMA VBR, but less so.

PC playback to USB DAC:
FLAC lossless L8 and DSD .ISOs. No need to use lossy when HDD are cheap enough to have multiple redundant backups. Even a 1TB drive stores a huge amount of music untouched and unmolested from it's original form, be it CD, HD download, SACD, DSD download, DVD-A or whatever else.

Anything I've had to save from youtube*:
Whatever format it was in (AAC? Ogg-Vorbis?). Some stuff just simply wasn't released and youtube is the only place it exists. I am not relying on a stable internet connection and no one goosing that data. I'll take a copy offline thanks.
 

Loonabae

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2019
Messages
24
Likes
13
MP3 has been shown to be transparent at 128kbps 15 years ago.

https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Hydrogenaudio_Listening_Tests

Yeah there samples were both AAC/MP3 are fine at 128kbps. People forget than AAC/Vorbis can trip on differnt samples, i tried the demo samples on those tests. I get a laugh at how better V5 Lame sounds over 96kb/s Vorbis on metal, classical and mild electro. Vorbis has stereo issues, QAAC sound mostly better and V5 lame sounds fine.
 

bravomail

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 19, 2018
Messages
817
Likes
461
Yeah there samples were both AAC/MP3 are fine at 128kbps. People forget than AAC/Vorbis can trip on differnt samples, i tried the demo samples on those tests. I get a laugh at how better V5 Lame sounds over 96kb/s Vorbis on metal, classical and mild electro. Vorbis has stereo issues, QAAC sound mostly better and V5 lame sounds fine.

AAC it is then!
 

A800

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 22, 2019
Messages
734
Likes
615
If I got the choice AAC >=256K.
 

tamagaba

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
12
Likes
26
Location
1077 Budapest, HUNGARY
Lame 320 MP3 CBR - Foobar, Audition or dBPoweramp
I have many lossless music format on PC but unfortunately I can not make different between HD music and lossy compressed format with ABX test
Therefore my HiFi budget has become cheaper :)
 

Asylum Seeker

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2020
Messages
414
Likes
295
Location
Guatemala
AptX & LDAC
 

Blujackaal

Active Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
221
Likes
102
I just stick with Musepack standard(170kbps) for space reasons and blows AAC, Lame, Vorbis away for transparency.
 

digitalfrost

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
1,521
Likes
3,086
Location
Palatinate, Germany
Wow that somebody is still using Musepack. I have a lot of files from the mid-2000s, but general lack of support made me move to MP3 once LAME got good enough.
 

exRanger

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Messages
25
Likes
26
While I never listen to "lossy" codecs @ my home systems, I do, in order to fit a bit more material onto the device and because the listening stakes aren't high, listen to Lame MP3 (HQ) 320 CBR on my portable SANSA Clip + players (I have 4), each of which is loaded up w/ music intended for certain activities, e.g., travel, heavy weightlifting (powerlifting), intenses cardio HIIT training, or just "takin' a stroll" through town -- the last activity somewhat hampered by living in a country -- France -- where everyone is under "house arrest". But I still get out and push the state's friggin' "personal boundary limits" daily. But, like I wrote, when it's "lossy", it's Lame MP3 (HQ) 320 CBR on a SANSA Clip + player.

PS: One of the four SANSA players, the one I use for accompanying my powerlifting session, does not have any "lossy" content on it: it's all FLAC. I want "everything" out of my music when I'm "under or pulling up 400+ pounds" (190-200 kilos over here in Metric-ville).

I realize that as I'm heading into my sixth decade on this rock and have a head and audio sensitivity ravaged by time, explosions (esp. use of firearms sans "hearing protection -- we didn't have such in the late 1970s in military theater), and tinnitus, I'm not hearing "everything" re: FLAC material on my SANSA, but my brain thinks I'm hearing "everything" and thus compels we to get in that extra set and/or rep. The psychological impact of sound - the "right" sound - on one's power can be astounding.
 
Last edited:

exRanger

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Messages
25
Likes
26
^^^ So I guess this "FLAC effect" I experience is a nod at the psychoacoustic qualities of certain music, certain sound quality (lossless), how I "think" I hear it, and the benefit(s) I derive from this effect.
 

jeffbook

Active Member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
139
Likes
191
Location
Columbus, Ohio
Lossless FLAC at home and 320kb mp3 in the Audis. Ripping to FLAC and file conversion to mp3 done with dbPoweramp.
 

wwenze

Major Contributor
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
1,284
Likes
1,827
For me it's either 320kbps MP3 or WAV. The space savings from FLAC doesn't feel worth the effort.

At one time I used musepack. Bad idea, compatibility-wise.

Back in 2003+ when I had a 64MB MP3 player I used 64kbps WMA.
 

exRanger

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Messages
25
Likes
26
None.
When disk is full, buy a new disk for the NAS.

The NAS element is still (!) something I need to pursue, as it is something friends @ other forums have been using for up to 4-5 years by now and yet I've sat on the fence, backing up lossless -- including damned large hi-rez FLAC data -- to an array of (I think I'm up to 12TB worth) hard drives and 3TB of "cloud" storage. Seems a single NAS would go far to (1) simplifying storage of and access to material and (2) provide "safekeeping" security associated with the - as I undertsand it - emergency backup system, i.e., "RAID". Even two NAS boxes would be less clutter than having a half dozen hard disc drives piled up. The cloud storage is, of course, sans "clutter", but for how long will it be around? Do I awaken one day to a world @ which Dropbox and/or Yandex Disc are just "gone" .... vanished, along w/ 4TB of my archived material?
 
Top Bottom