Lossless Music is Nonsense... with poll

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: sheik124

Originally posted by: Dubb
I'm sticking with lossless. go suck an egg.

Why not suck an OGG?
:laugh: I crack myself up

buahaha, Damn I was SOOO thinking of that as soon as I read that post!

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Originally posted by: Cawchy87
192kb/s vbr mp3 is all i need too

Fixed That and some 320kb/s cbrs are all that are in my collection.
Quite happy on 2x Promedia 2.1s (room) and the Megaworks 550 (htpc).

 

[BillyBatson]

i have 3500+ mp3z, not a bad collection of music i liek and listen to. If i ahd the HD space to sapre iw ouldn't mind them being lossless and maybe in a few years i'll go back and rebuild for the time being and with my current equipment, 192kbps is good enough

 

[StrangerGuy]

192 VBR kbps is good enough for my crappy PSP earphones.

 

[IAteYourMother]

maybe if you have a sh!tty audio setup. OP, what's your audio rig?

 

[Xyclone]

I can't tell the difference above a 192kb/s anyways, so screw lossless.

 

[loic2003]

I'd like lossless if I downloaded music from an online music store. I use AAC @ 192 I think these days

 

[13Gigatons]

I prefer 16/44.1 or 24/96 played over a high end system. MP3's are great for ipods but they suck if you have a nice Home Theater.

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure
Give me a good old mp3 anyday... I can't hear that well anyway, no need in preserving those high frequencies. compression baby! COMPRESSION.

And don't get me started on people who run out of space on the HD cause they've got 1 hour of lossless music on the drives... let me introduce you to my friend, LAME

I am intrigued by your ideas. Newsletter by chance?

 

[DaveSimmons]

I realize the OP is a drunken rant you'll regret when you sober up, but anyway:

I have my CDs in FLAC because

- It's a backup of my collection (scratched CD? I can burn it back with 100% quality)
- I can afford the drive space (I only need so much VFINX)
- Peace of mind in listening (if there's an artifact, it's from the CD audio not the encoding)
- Transcoding to new bitrates and formats, lossless is just as good as a fresh rip from the CD. (I can pick any bitrate or format for a portable with no lossy-to-lossy artifacts and change the bitrate or format as often as I like)

 

[Saint Nick]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure
Give me a good old mp3 anyday... I can't hear that well anyway, no need in preserving those high frequencies. compression baby! COMPRESSION.

Agreed

same here... i'll take 192kbit mp3 any day, hell even 128 suffices.

 

[13Gigatons]

Lossless is better for backing up cd's, it uses more space but not as much as wav file and it perserves the orignal sound quality should you want to burn a copy for your car or other need.

 

[Baked]

For those who can't hear the high and low frequencies, iTunes is the way to go. For those with gifted ears, FLAC FTW. I use FLAC for computer listening and LAME -standard for iPod.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

If and only if everyone used a standard LAME setting such as alt preset standard, then I might not mind mp3 only. HOWEVER lossless is the best way to store music if only because you can then compress it to whatever technology is best. LAME mp3 is fine, but if the industry makes a change to ogg or aac then you're SOL if your collection is stuck in mp3.

Disc capacity is large enough, internet is fast enough, CPUs are powerful enough for everyone to store their music in lossless and convert it to a lossy format for their portable player of choice.

 

[Rubycon]

LAME is definitely named appropriately given the results it provides. Really it's ok for folks using software and yes there is some real junk out there.

BSS Soundweb is where it's at.

 

[FoBoT]

my hearing was ruined by 4 years in the engine room of a submarine, so anything sounds ok to me

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
my hearing was ruined by 4 years in the engine room of a submarine, so anything sounds ok to me

You forget something.

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
you are an idiot.

How many people have speakers that can even play these preserved frequencies?

Assume ear buds/$30 headphones, or $300 off the shelf 5-1 home system that 95% of people have.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn

Originally posted by: FoBoT
my hearing was ruined by 4 years in the engine room of a submarine, so anything sounds ok to me

You forget something.

i wore my hearing protection most of the time, but it still whacked some of my frequencies

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
How many people have speakers that can even play these preserved frequencies?

Assume ear buds/$30 headphones, or $300 off the shelf 5-1 home system that 95% of people have.

these tend to bring out the life in music that has it.

Outside of those audition rooms, the UE-10 pro IEM's are superb. They allow full movement on the stage and block out noise from your neighboring performers. ZING!

Originally posted by: FoBoT


i wore my hearing protection most of the time, but it still whacked some of my frequencies

Yet another reason to despise subs. They are worse than airplanes. Poseidon's Satan.

 

[her209]

I wouldn't care if you said you like to bang dudes. To each his own.

 

[Salvador]

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
you are an idiot. get a good system that recreates an accurate dynamic range, flat frequency response, and then you will see the light.

as far as SACDs and DVD-As being garbage, i would say that's true.

Agreed. You have to have a good system and you have to train your ear. Once you've gone there though, nothing will ever be recorded well enough. I run into that problem all the time. Apparently, there aren't very many people out there these days that care about original recordings. It's just criminal in the pop music world. They figure that most people are like you and don't give a crap about what they're listening to.

 

[Salvador]

Also, people that buy downloads for the price of recorded cd's are nuts. Why pay the same money or nearly the same money for a compressed recording. Idiots!

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Baked
For those who can't hear the high and low frequencies, iTunes is the way to go. For those with gifted ears, FLAC FTW. I use FLAC for computer listening and LAME -standard for iPod.

excuse me sonny, but my sight is leaving me......did you jsut equate itunes with not being able to play low and high frequencies?

*looks over at his apple lossless collection*


Mind ellaborating on what you meant?

 

[AccruedExpenditure]

This is best thread ever.