320 bitrate vs FLAC (distinguishable differences)?

[PENG]

That's incorrect. The ABX test is designed--and thus by definition--to detect whether or not one can reliably tell difference. It is not about preference at all. So some DBTs are not about preference. So simply removing "only" doesn't work, and really the whole sentence needs to be reworked to be accurate.

I have never disputed that fact as I understand what ABX test is designed to do, that is as you stated, "to detect whether or not one can reliably tell difference". I thought I made that clear in my last post but I guess not explicit enough. That said, there is nothing incorrect about my point that ABX test can, or could if that helps, reveal someone's preference, simply because if one can tell a difference, and I mean a real difference, then it is quite possible that one may prefer the sound characteristics/signature of one over the other. Logically speaking, just because something is designed to do one thing, does not mean it cannot do another thing that it is NOT designed to do. The point I tried to make in my post was a point of logic only and nothing more. The logic being, if the test reveals someone's preference, then it must have detected a real difference while if the test detects a difference, it may not reveal that someone has a preference.

With due respect, you seem fixated on what the test is designed to do (and on that point I repeat, I am in agreement from the beginning) and not willing to accept that it can also do something it is not designed to do, or perhaps we got lost in the wording somewhere along the line.

 

[yepimonfire]

Yeah I figured that too, maybe I need to see her singing voice waves on a good spectrum analyzer, one with mic and amplified another without. If what I heard was real, then I am quite sure it is in the input side of any amplification process. So you don't think being too close to the mic is not a potential issue?

What sort of distortion are you hearing? Clipping? It's not necessary to go to 32bit, 24 bit has a 115dB dynamic range, if the voice recording is clipping, all one would need to do is reduce the input sensitivity.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[PENG]

What sort of distortion are you hearing? Clipping? It's not necessary to go to 32bit, 24 bit has a 115dB dynamic range, if the voice recording is clipping, all one would need to do is reduce the input sensitivity.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

Last time I posted about it, no one else reported hear such thing so it must be just me being sensitive to those harmonics. Yes it sounded like clipping to me, and yes reducing sensitivity should do it, or she can stay back a few inches. I was only kidding about the 32 bit thing, but thank you for your response. I am happy to hear from people who know more about recording, mixing and mastering.

 

[Dan Madden]

So this Krall CD has the same mastering between the 2.0 cd version and the 5.1 DTS DVD Audio version? I don't think so...the improved audio is from the re-mastering, not the frequency/bit rate.

I listen to the DVD audio version of this recording in 2 channel stereo.......not DD. There is no DTS track on this DVD audio recording. The 2 channel version offers the highest resolution. In the disc menu, it offers a pile of options as to how you want to listen to it.......each one offering different bit and sampling resolutions. I'm going to assume that the 2 channel option offers up the original digital master at 24/ 96khz. Whether it is re-mastered or not I'm not sure. Obviously for the surround formats it was because it was not originally recorded as such or for that format.

One thing I know for sure is that this a fabulous recording and it sounds sweet.

 

[John Passantino]

Last time I posted about it, no one else reported hear such thing so it must be just me being sensitive to those harmonics. Yes it sounded like clipping to me, and yes reducing sensitivity should do it, or she can stay back a few inches. I was only kidding about the 32 bit thing, but thank you for your response. I am happy to hear from people who know more about recording, mixing and mastering.

I've tried listening to the CD and to the Apple Music files of Adele's latest album. I couldn't get through three songs without turning it off. I love her voice, but I physically can't tolerate the recording. Don't think it's the bit rate or depth, just the recording technique.

 

[PENG]

I listen to the DVD audio version of this recording in 2 channel stereo.......not DD. There is no DTS track on this DVD audio recording. The 2 channel version offers the highest resolution. In the disc menu, it offers a pile of options as to how you want to listen to it.......each one offering different bit and sampling resolutions. I'm going to assume that the 2 channel option offers up the original digital master at 24/ 96khz. Whether it is re-mastered or not I'm not sure. Obviously for the surround formats it was because it was not originally recorded as such or for that format.

One thing I know for sure is that this a fabulous recording and it sounds sweet.

I have that disc in DVD-A also, it is THIS one. It is definitive specified as lossless, but there are other version, including one that is supposed to be equivalent to the one in SACD:

https://www.discogs.com/Diana-Krall-Love-Scenes/release/6936509, this one has the stereo in 24/192 and 5.1 in 96/24.

The booklet that came with the disc has the same information as what's provided in the link, all about mastering but nothing about recording except for the location.

I may try to A/B the 96/24 and 16/44.1 again this weekend but any difference can theoretically be attributed to different remastering as they all seem to come from the same original recording.

 

[PENG]

I've tried listening to the CD and to the Apple Music files of Adele's latest album. I couldn't get through three songs without turning it off. I love her voice, but I physically can't tolerate the recording. Don't think it's the bit rate or depth, just the recording technique.

Thanks, finally one person agreed to me, just sort of. The funny thing is, I have the CD, BR, and vinyl versions, the distortions I heard apply to all of the medium. It is the vocal part that put me off. I don't have to turn it off as such because at low level listening, I can concentrate on the musicality part of her singing. I guess we can't expect any future improvement if only 0.000001% of people who buy her albums pay attention to the recording quality.

 

[lovinthehd]

I listen to the DVD audio version of this recording in 2 channel stereo.......not DD. There is no DTS track on this DVD audio recording. The 2 channel version offers the highest resolution. In the disc menu, it offers a pile of options as to how you want to listen to it.......each one offering different bit and sampling resolutions. I'm going to assume that the 2 channel option offers up the original digital master at 24/ 96khz. Whether it is re-mastered or not I'm not sure. Obviously for the surround formats it was because it was not originally recorded as such or for that format.

One thing I know for sure is that this a fabulous recording and it sounds sweet.

Ah, the first version of dvd-audio disc I found was a DTS version, this one.

Hard to know sometimes what the source of alternate versions on a disc like this are, let alone in general how little technical information we usually get with a given recording.

 

[jmalecki05]

I have a large collection of MP3 320 that I ripped from the original CD about 15 years ago. When compared to their lossless counterpart today, I do not detect a difference in a car or on headphones (Sennheiser HD598 on Fiio X5 generation 1). I have yet to conduct a blind study on a hi-fi system, but I or anyone else would be surprised that I can prove a difference.

 

[3db]

Thanks, finally one person agreed to me, just sort of. The funny thing is, I have the CD, BR, and vinyl versions, the distortions I heard apply to all of the medium. It is the vocal part that put me off. I don't have to turn it off as such because at low level listening, I can concentrate on the musicality part of her singing. I guess we can't expect any future improvement if only 0.000001% of people who buy her albums pay attention to the recording quality.

I have an exmaple of this as well. The last Von Bondies release I bought in vinyl and it also came packaged with a CD. Big BONUS so I thought. It turns out that the production was p?ss poor and distortion was running havoc on both formats.

 

[psbfan9]

*Edit: I'll be damned, I re-worded my serch just a little bit...

http://flac-lossless.org/heavy-metal/

Anyone familiar with the site?

@Pogre, have you used this site? Any thoughts?

To anyone else considering using this site they have a large collection of music in many different genre's.

 

[Bucknekked]

Last time I posted about it, no one else reported hear such thing so it must be just me being sensitive to those harmonics. Yes it sounded like clipping to me, and yes reducing sensitivity should do it, or she can stay back a few inches. I was only kidding about the 32 bit thing, but thank you for your response. I am happy to hear from people who know more about recording, mixing and mastering.

Peng
I remember when you posted this originally. I had just purchased an Adele CD and have since picked up another. I couldn't hear what you were commenting on back then and unfortunately I still don't hear anything but goodness now. All that means is I didn't hear what you are hearing. It doesn't mean there's nothing there or that you aren't hearing exactly what you describe.

This is one area of listening to music I will totally subscribe to the old motto "beauty is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder". It doesn't matter if the majority of Adele fans don't hear the distortion you pick up on. They are happy as clams. If you hear it, you hear it. Don't let the unwashed masses sway you.

 

[Ponzio]

To each his own. Personally CBR 320kbps mp3 (lame) is more than adequate since 2007 for everyday listening and FLAC/WAV for critical listening. I don't have golden ears like some our listeners do, so this should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[KenM10759]

To each his own. Personally CBR 320kbps mp3 (lame) is more than adequate since 2007 for everyday listening and FLAC/WAV for critical listening. I don't have golden ears like some our listeners do, so this should be taken with a grain of salt.

Agreed. I have 320kbps MP3's on a MicroSD card in my Garmin Zumo so I can listen via Bluetooth with my Sena 20S set in my motorcycle helmet. At home when I swipe the grills off my floorstanding speakers and sit in the sweet spot, I appreciate Tidal HiFi "Masters" via my Bluesound Vault 2.

No goldenears here either, I just know what I like.

 

[Bucknekked]

Agreed. I have 320kbps MP3's on a MicroSD card in my Garmin Zumo so I can listen via Bluetooth with my Sena 20S set in my motorcycle helmet. At home when I swipe the grills off my floorstanding speakers and sit in the sweet spot, I appreciate Tidal HiFi "Masters" via my Bluesound Vault 2.

No goldenears here either, I just know what I like.

I don't have goldenears, tin ears, rabbit ears or any other kind of special ears. I just have ears that love listening to music. The older I get, the more I fall in to the "live and let live" category when it comes to things like formats, bit rates, and anything else we tend to discuss far too seriously. I've tried and experimented in my own listening room with just about all the various formats. Maybe not 100% of them, but close. A poorly recorded song sounds that way no matter the fancy prep. A well recorded piece of music shines through whatever form it got stuck in.

My library today sounds better than anything I've ever put together. Even Adele sounds good