WAV VS Ogg 64kbps (can't hear the difference)

[VIAN]

I'm just a regular guy I guess. But I can appreciate good sound. I have $200 headphones, I think. Sennheiser HD 280 Pro. I think they sound much better than regular headphones. I upgraded my radio inside my Corolla and it sounded significantly clearer. I really appreciated My Klipsch Promedia 2.1. They sound soooo much better than the flat and lifeless sound coming from my $50 2.1 Creative computer speakers.

But I cannot tell the difference between WAV (ripped from a CD) and Ogg 64kbps. I played them using Foobar2000, listening to Say It Right by Nelly Furtado. I can't hear any difference. Maybe I'm not listening to the right track. Is there any track you can think of where one is capable of telling the difference.

 

[Excelsior]

Well, that track is sure to have its dynamics compressed in the studio. So even in WAV format its quality would be kind of questionable (IMO). Then, I wouldn't say your Promedia's would be revealing enough to show a difference between the two. The same might go for the 280s.

 

[selfy]

Try comparing something that has lots of different instruments playing at once if you want to experience the compression differences. Take classical or some symphonic metal where there are many times a mid range guitar doing a solo with some background violas/bass/symbols/<insert other instrument> also playing.

In highly compressed audio codecs, the guitar solo with "swamp" the audio in the encoding. This effectively "removes" or "quiets" the other instruments. In lightly compressed or lossless audio codecs, there will be such small difference that only a live performance versus recording could possible enlighten.

Even then, one has to ask, "does a file format that is 5 times larger with only marginally better quality really worth it?"

In my personal audio archives, I use the old fashioned mp3 at 320 kbps and cannot justify doubling the size of my entire archive to warrant an upgrade to say 786 kbps flac.

 

[JAG87]

HD280s are not great headphones. They are above the average, but they are not anywhere near hi-fi, and they are not worth 200 dollars, I hope you didn't pay that much for them. I have them, and the difference between them and HD650s is like night and day.

I've done plenty of codec testing, and I came to the same conlusions as you. OGG is an unbelievable codec, with only 64 kbps it has quality that is nearly the same as PCM. But its not the same, and you can tell the difference especially in certain songs. Still OGG remains the best audio codec today. Its sad that it is not used in more applications.