Quote:
Originally Posted by flip
Until Itunes switches to a lossless format I'll be buying most of my music in CD format or DLing it <removed> in Flac or Wav.
Anyone who cares about music should be up in arms about the MP3 revolution that has occurred in the last 10 years.
We have basically gone from DVD to VHS in the last 10 years and no one cares. If you listen to anything but Flac, Wav, Apple Lossless you are ruining your music and destroying your ability to hear good music by listening to lossy formats.
|
I partially agree. Everyone's set-up is different. Many of us have PC speakers, ear buds, or even home theater systems incapable of usefully conveying the difference between "good" lossy and lossless music. Also, everyone's ability (and interest) to hear the difference between lossy and lossless music varies.
Personally, I highly highly doubt I could consistently tell the difference between
any song encoded as a 320kbps MP3 and a lossless FLAC, even when played on ideal equipment. True double-blind testing would offer similar results for most people, I'd reckon.
Reason being, MP3 algorithms have come a long way. For example, nowadays, at 320kbps w/
LAME encoding, few MP3 tracks lose much 'integral' audio data to begin with. Fewer yet lose data that is even (immediately) perceptible to the human ear. Abberations are most often very subtle. Lossy encoding is a science, and it has come a long way. (Not to say that there isn't a place for lossless music... there certainly is.)
I say all of this to (maybe; partially) rationalize my standardized use of 224kbps MP3 encoding for my entire music library (~10000 tracks). I've found it to be the best compromise between sonic integrity and file size for everyday use on my home computer. Everyone has different priorities, and for me, storing all that music as lossless tracks just isn't entirely practical. Though, I will admit, with the way prices on large storage external hard drives are tumbling lately (
just one example), that could change.