262
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

Just do it.

Flac > Spotify.

[-] IllNess@infosec.pub 1 points 1 week ago

I keep getting advice of Flac > MP3 320 kbs.

I can't tell the difference to tell you the truth. Is it really worth it for audiophiles considering how much more space Flac files takes up?

[-] FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

There are online test you can do to see if you can successfully identify the FLAC from the MP3. I did one and failed miserably.

They say that if you have a very good DAC, amplifier and speaker / headphone system (as well as a good ear for audio), that you can hear it. But I would do the test first to see if it applies to your situation.

[-] IllNess@infosec.pub 0 points 1 week ago

I have Sennheiser HD 25 I bought 15 years ago. I play music through my Pixel 5a with a headphone jack and my iMac. I have no idea if this is good enough for the test but I will try it anyway.

I did the NPR test.

I'm on my iMac and I chose 128 kbps four times... I chose 320 kbps once and Uncompressed WAV once.

I did so horribly. Lol.

This puts either my hearing limits or the limit of my tech. If I don't get better equipment, I have my answer forever.

This is truly great. Thank you for this suggestion.

[-] FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I’m happy it helped. I was a musician and audiophile for most of my life so I was equally shocked to fail 😄 I also tested on my iMac too. I’m tempted sometimes to get an external DAC and maybe a nice amp, but I’m not sure I want the clutter.

[-] zueski@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

It is better, but it depends on the audio for the difference. Also, it would probably be hard to hear the difference playing over a phones speakers. The weakest link in the chain is always the problem you notice the most. Having a good setup for amp/speakers and you can hear the difference. Using Bluetooth earbuds to mow the lawn, it doesn’t matter. Sitting in my living room on my nice stereo, I notice.

[-] LedgeDrop@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

It could be the quality of your headphones.

I'm not an audiophile, but back-in-the-day I bought some analog "sennheiser studio monitors" as opposed to "just headphones".

I actually returned the first one and exchanged them, because when I listened to a live recorded CD, I kept hearing loud "pops" that I didn't hear with my "regular headphones". I assumed they were defective.

The exchanged sennheiser had the same "pop" in this CD. It turns out, most "regular headphones" didn't have the same depth in sound frequency as studio monitors and the "pops" were accidental artifacts that were mixed into the CD.

For other CD's, I'd hear telephones ringing and sirens in the background.

Eventually, I got use to it. Then after a few years, I replaced my CD collection with mp3's... and I could tell a different in songs/albums I was really familiar with. The base wasn't as deep, the high sounds weren't as high, I didn't hear telephones ringing in the background.

I had the same sennheiser, it was just that the nature of mp3's "flattened" the music.

Now, with Bluetooth and the disappearance of 3.5 mm jacks, there are too many layers of digital conversion happening. I've given up... and now just have some cheap ear buds I listen to.

[-] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Flac files contain orders of magnitude more data. As for the listening experience it's only ever going to be as good as the speakers at the other end. You'll also need a wired connection to said speakers in order to avoid some compression over Bluetooth. (Unless there's some newfangled lossless BT protocol that I'm unaware of.)

[-] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 week ago

Go to Opus 128 kbps. About the same as MP3 320 or better.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The space it takes up is negligible in the modern era of cheap SSDs (and even cheaper hard drives).

The main benefit is not in being able to hear a difference from 320Kbps mp3 (I know I sure can't), but knowing that you can re-encode the file as many times as you want, without any quality loss (assuming you're going from lossless to lossless, of course). Or create an mp3 from the flac file at any time, with the same quality as a ripped CD.

So basically FLAC is great if you produce/edit/re-encode your music files often. If you don't do any of that (and have no plans to future-proof your music collection), then 320Kbps MP3 is more than adequate for your needs.

this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2025
262 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

74006 readers
744 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS