Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
GunsOfBrixton
911
Sep 23, 2017
bookmark_border
Take this test: http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality If you don't nail it, you're probably not going to get much value out of the extra money you pay for lossless streaming.
Sep 23, 2017
MikeMD
1100
Sep 25, 2017
bookmark_border
GunsOfBrixtonthis is a really great resource, thanks for sharing!
Sep 25, 2017
Heefty
1387
Sep 27, 2017
bookmark_border
GunsOfBrixtonMy only complaint with that test is that unless you are familiar with the artists they have in the test, you have no idea what they're supposed to sound like which makes it rather more difficult to get an accurate assessment without listening to each option about 30 times.
FWIW, If you know you're going into lossless, you know you're getting the right sound which removes the guess work. That has value. The next logical question beyond that is: Can you tell when you listen to it compressed after hearing what it's supposed to sound like? If not, then you're wasting your money on lossless.
Sep 27, 2017
GunsOfBrixton
911
Sep 28, 2017
bookmark_border
HeeftyThat's legit, but I'd submit that you're changing the nature of the test when listening to known content. When you know the material, you're actually answering a different (though still valid) question. I think the NPR type of test is more representative for the vast majority of listeners who are going to be listening to a variety of content and won't be working from a "database" of known content.
You sound like a genuine audiophile that takes great satisfaction in the type of critical listening that is a treasure hunt for minute differences and the discovery of the "true" sound. That's not a knock, by the way, I respect that. I'm a natural skeptic, and pretty rigorous about testing things. I vouch that it is absolutely possible to tell the difference between file types because in careful listening I can consistently identify them above chance on a pretty large sample of blind tests (think something like 40% right where chance would be 20%). But I also can conclude that, for me, the effort it takes to get those results don't justify me going lossless, and instead decide that I want to spend my money collecting different headphone sounds. Others may decide they want to try to train their ears to better hear the differences (which your method above would be great for). To each his own.
A lot of people new to the world of audio are unintentionally misled because they hear hardcore audiophiles talk about minute differences as if they are great chasms. It's like an amateur golfer listening to PGA pros complain about a shot that would be once in a lifetime for the amateur, without realizing that the pros' are judging on an entirely different level. As a result, they either leave the hobby in bewilderment or needlessly spend a lot of money thinking they are hunting something obvious, when it's really very fine distinctions. I think a lot of people can benefit from the type of a-ha moment that tests like these can deliver.
Sep 28, 2017
blackflower168
2
Sep 28, 2017
bookmark_border
GunsOfBrixtonNoted, cuz I was thinking, if I get an mid tier audio headphones and uses a 320kbps, I feel I won't get getting the full potential use of the headphones
Sep 28, 2017
Heefty
1387
Sep 28, 2017
bookmark_border
GunsOfBrixtonDefinitely good points. My test was is bit more direct although I didn't completely spell it out. I'm suggesting that someone with the question the OP brought up take their favorite track on CD and A/B compare. Get that track that you've listened to 1k times on repeat on CD pulled up on Spotify and see if you can tell the difference. That will help you quantify the value of the lossless audio quality.
I do take my time to critically listen and find out what a track is supposed to sound like and rather enjoy the hobby when I have time for it. That being said, I spend probably 80% of my listening time on Spotify extreme. When I find an album or artist that I thoroughly enjoy there, its lossless time. I know they don't make money on Spotify, so I feel obligated to contribute by purchasing an album or two from them via hdtracks or buying spinning plastic. Then I get to do the critical listening on it and I can't listen to it on Spotify anymore because so much is missing. When I'm just drive-by hearing though, 320kbps is satisfactory for me.
I completely agree on the statement about the supposed GIGANTIC leaps in quality going from lossless to lossy amongst the elitist audiophiles of the world. Until I've really been able to put in the leg work on an album, Spotify is just fine and not missing so much that it completely loses all value imo. I suppose that's where I'm more of a music lover than an audiophile though.
Sep 28, 2017
View Full Discussion
Related Posts
Trending Posts in Audiophile