Before I start bombarding my hard drive with Loseless stuff, and eventually buy at 1 TB harddrive...
Can people that have "upgraded" to lossless tell me honestly if it is really necessary?

I basically have about 40 GBs of Video Games and Movie music, because of this amazing website.
I know that the same music in Lossless formats would be like 500 GB of music.

Can you really hear anything different?

I think it depends on what you're playing it on.

For something like a PSP (which is what I use for my music player) I don't think it's really worth it.

But, if you've got a good enough music player/speakers I think it's worthwhile.

If you've got nice speakers that you listen to your music on all the time and you have a huge hard drive (that you use exclusively for music), then go for it. Otherwise, I say stick with a good high quality VBR mp3. If you have decent speakers, you will hear a noticeable difference, but not enough to make it matter. For me, at least, about 70% of my listening happens on a pair of headphones, albeit decent, but still headphones.

Even when I listen to my mp3's on the big sound system I listen to sometimes, I don't really hear much of a difference. Just make a good mp3 and run it through your speakers, then run the CD through the speakers (just pick something you own the CD to) and listen the difference. Do you even notice a difference? Play it for someone else, and don't tell them which is which. Do it with a couple different albums you own.

The problem is, some people encode really crappy mp3's, but if the mp3 is encoded directly from the physical media to a good high variable bitrate, then I don't really think there is that much difference. Sure, you could show me a graph of the frequencies that are being cut out, but how much of a difference do you actually hear, and does that degrade the listening experience? For me, it absolutely does not. Also, was the recording done well to begin with? You're not going to get better quality than is on the CD, that's for sure.

So, a FLAC (or other lossless format) will be higher quality, but weigh the difference and the disk drive impact against each other.

Just do what sounds good to you, that's what I say. I'm sure there will be all sorts of people that contradict me completely, but it all depends on the needs and wants of the individual user, really.

They all sound the same to me to be honest. Well I do super blast my music with my headphones on so even low quality sounds the same to me.

I'm gonna go with a no on this one since when I convert rips I used to make them @ 320kbps, because of good quality with not much space taken. I later then found out that -V0 VBR takes up less space than 320 and sounds the same, so I make those now. I rather use up my HD for roms, isos, and programs.

Like tanis said, it all depends on what you're looking to do with the files.

For me personally, I can hear only a slight difference in audio quality between lossless and lossy files, but that's not why I prefer lossless. The reason why I prefer lossless, in conjunction with the Exact Audio Copy program, is that I can archive an exact digital copy of the CD on my hard drive in the case that I have plans with the physical disc or it becomes damaged in some sort, and with programs like foobar2000, I can also use these files for playback on my computer and convert them to MP3s of any quality range for whenever I need them without altering the original CD backup.

Anyway, if you don't plan to have CD backups or you can't hear enough of a difference between lossless and mp3, then maybe lossless won't be worth it to you. :)

Btw, to be a bit more accurate, I would say that 40GBs of MP3s might equate to about 160GBs in lossless files, not 500GBs. :p

Speaking of this stuff:
I have a problem...

I got some music in Lossless format, but it's a whole CD.
How can I convert it into individual MP3?

There are two ways in which you can do this, but I'll give you the easiest way that I know of.

If you don't already have foobar2000, download and install it to your computer. Open the program and drag & drop the CUE sheet from the soundtrack and then select the tracks that you want to convert (Ctrl+A for all). Now right-click anywhere within the selected items and go to where it says Convert. Since this is probably the first time you've used this feature, a window will appear where you can select the Output format. Click on the dropdown box and select MP3 (LAME), 245kbs, V0, fast. If you don't see that option, select anything that says MP3 (LAME) and then click on the box next to the dropdown menu [...] and move the slider all the way to the right for the highest vbr quality, press the OK button and you're pretty much finished. when you press the OK button for that window, you'll be asked where you wan to save the file.

Note: in that window it says Output files, you can replace %title% with %track% - %title% and your files will be displayed as 01 - track title and so on.

Hope this doesn't sound too complicated but I can only tell ya what I know. :)

Nice, thanks for the tut.
Also like that it's freeware.

I'll go see if I can get it to work now.
:D

no they all sound the same.

No, which is why whenever I rip albums, I do it in 320 kbps .mp3 format. Great quality, manageable size and easily played anywhere (Unlike most lossless filetypes).

I think lossless is worth it:
- you can transcode to whatever format you want (mp3/aac) when transferring to your mp3 player
- if you like to edit files , well better have the source for the best results.
- they are rare samples that are not as good when encoded with 320kps, but it take quite a lot of effort to figure out the difference.
Here's a topic about listening fatigue during abx test:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=75321


I think vbr0 is better than 320kps in term of quality vs space saved ratio.

There are two ways in which you can do this, but I'll give you the easiest way that I know of.

If you don't already have foobar2000, download and install it to your computer. Click on the dropdown box and select MP3 (LAME), 245kbs, V0, fast.

You might be confused that it asks for "lame.exe." You need to download the lame encoder, which you can get here (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php) . Put lame_enc.dll and lame.exe in your foobar components folder and now the instructions cyberspark gave you should work.

Most people overestimate their listening abilites. In a proper blinded listening test many would be suprised that they can't even distinguish V4 from lossless. It also doesn't make a big difference what speakers your listening this on. Crappy headphones can make artifacts stand out even more.
So make a test for yourself and choose whatever sounds transparent to you, or just stick with V2 or V0 for a safety margin. CBR is just a waste of space.

The only real benefit of lossless is it's backup purpose or if you plan on using the music for editing.



You need to download the lame encoder, which you can get here (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php)
Download LAME 3.98.2 not the alpha version.

Download LAME 3.98.2 not the alpha version.

yeah, sorry. Forgot to mention that.

Most people overestimate their listening abilities.
Yes , but it's always frustrating one day when you realize that you didn't have the best listening experience, with a particular album/track because of a lossy codec. So I prefer to be "safe", especially with stuff I value the most.

Otherwise an interesting compromise would be to use lossyWav (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lossywav). Unfortunately this increase size if you use it before reencoding to mp3.

I want someone to pick the half canine vote already.

there, happy?... xD

Yes! :)

I'll assume most people don't get the "half canine" joke...

I thought it was pretty funny, but if its a specific referrence, no, I didn't get it.

Only worth if you got the space i'd say..

I think we'r in an era of transition.. and lossless will be more & more common.
When 1tb drives will be very cheap and "standard" drives for everyone (while it's probably 320Gb today)

I'd like to mention that you will probably never find old and obscure VGM albums in lossless anyway... (oh yeah you'll find that MGS or biohazard one..) but what about albums like that J.B. Harold Sound Collection (http://vgmdb.net/album/5523)?

You can keep all your rockman and square enix albums in lossless.. i am still waiting for a REAL rarity on that VGM lossless thread.
I'll change my mind after that.

I personally Download Lossless, and burn to CD. Then, if I want the music on my computer, I rip it to OGG.

@Myrkul

I'd like to mention that you will probably never find old and obscure VGM albums in lossless anyway...
Some recent stuff are hard to find in lossless too.
Just depends how much it is popular.

By the way, get the Sentinel Returns OST by John Carpenter,
before it completely disappear:
Thread 66848

Before I start bombarding my hard drive with Loseless stuff, and eventually buy at 1 TB harddrive...
Can people that have "upgraded" to lossless tell me honestly if it is really necessary?

it's like comparing a 1080p movie to a DVD. CD / lossless = high definition audio.
if you have proper good speakers or headphones then you can experience the difference. you'll benefit nothing playing it with laptop speakers and default ipod heaphones. thats like watching a blu ray movie on a crt.

the benefit for everyone on this forum is that by providing lossless downloads, anyone who wants can convert it to any other format they want. so everyone wins.

it's like comparing a 1080p movie to a DVD. CD / lossless = high definition audio.
if you have proper good speakers or headphones then you can experience the difference. you'll benefit nothing playing it with laptop speakers and default ipod heaphones. thats like watching a blu ray movie on a crt.

the benefit for everyone on this forum is that by providing lossless downloads, anyone who wants can convert it to any other format they want. so everyone wins.

That's the only reason I use FLACs...I can be sure I get a good mp3 out of a FLAC(in lieu of a CD.) As far as CD's being "high definition audio" , that might be true if you compare them to records or tapes, but not compared with what there is today. You have DVD audio, full 7.1 audio on a BluRay, and all sorts of other formats that are WAY better than standard 44100 hz, 16 bit quality that you find on a CD.

it's like comparing a 1080p movie to a DVD. CD / lossless = high definition audio.
if you have proper good speakers or headphones then you can experience the difference. you'll benefit nothing playing it with laptop speakers and default ipod heaphones. thats like watching a blu ray movie on a crt.

Your comparison is flawed. Most of the time you don't see any lossless video, even blu ray is lossy. The difference is mostly a higher resolution and it's actualy a difference most people easily see and benefit from.
Audio is a much more complicated thing and the codecs have evolved over the years so that 128kbps acuatly can provide near CD quality today. In contrast to video most people have a hard time distinguishing lossy from lossless. And those that claim to hear differences often fall for placebo effects.

Furthermore listening to lossy on very cheap stuff could make things easier to spot then on a hifi system. Because lossy codecs mask frequencies and stuff you're not supposed to hear with a linear frequency response in mind (like on good speakers) while cheaper systems can boost frequencies you would normaly not hear and thus reveal artifacts. One of the first LAME finetuners used cheap headphones because they made him hear stuff he otherwise couldn't.
So people with good system are more likely not to hear artifacts and potentialy have no benfit from lossless quality wise.

Furthermore listening to lossy on very cheap stuff could make things easier to spot then on a hifi system. Because lossy codecs mask frequencies and stuff you're not supposed to hear with a linear frequency response in mind (like on good speakers) while cheaper systems can boost frequencies you would normaly not hear and thus reveal artifacts. One of the first LAME finetuners used cheap headphones because they made him hear stuff he otherwise couldn't.
So people with good system are more likely not to hear artifacts and potentialy have no benfit from lossless quality wise.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense and you obviously do not know what you're talking about. Most people who rip their CDs to lossless have audio setups that are adequate enough for listeners to easily distinguish the difference in audio quality of lossless vs lossy formats.

Everyone creating large collections of VGM in mp3 or some other lossy format is essentially wasting their time, effort, hard disk space and optical media and will want to eventually re-rip or re-download their whole collection to a lossless format once they are willing to invest in a proper DAC/amp/headphone or speaker setup and a few hard drives, which continually become larger in capacity and cheaper every year.

Ever did a proper blind listening test comparing lossless vs. say Lame -V0? I guess not.

Where those other 3 half canines comes from? We must hunt them down before they begin to grow in packs.

also what if the person is deaf in one ear? Would the format still matter?

.

I think the answer can be summarised as this.

If you're going to be listening to lossless through shit speakers and cheap-ass Skullcandy headphones then No.

If you however are interested in audio and have a pair of decent headphones and speakers then Yes.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense and you obviously do not know what you're talking about. Most people who rip their CDs to lossless have audio setups that are adequate enough for listeners to easily distinguish the difference in audio quality of lossless vs lossy formats.

Everyone creating large collections of VGM in mp3 or some other lossy format is essentially wasting their time, effort, hard disk space and optical media and will want to eventually re-rip or re-download their whole collection to a lossless format once they are willing to invest in a proper DAC/amp/headphone or speaker setup and a few hard drives, which continually become larger in capacity and cheaper every year.

I'd like to think I'm not wasting my time, considering I have very nice headphones and I can personally barely tell the difference between high quality mp3s and so-called lossless. As was said before, a lot of people who claim to hear the difference are overestimating their hearing capabilities. Plus, can your portable music player play lossless? I didn't think so.

Plus, can your portable music player play lossless? I didn't think so.

In that case can we call you God?. Since you seem to be all-knowing that is, or at least all-knowing enough to know that his PMP can't play lossless files.

At least I know my players can. 32GB Cowon S9 (FLAC, APE, WAV) and 64GB iPod Touch 3G (ALAC, WAV). For high-end headphones I'm currently using the Westone 3 True-Fit IEM for commuting with a pair of JH-13 Pro IEM's for everything else.

I can't tell the difference between lossless and 320k mp3. I'm getting old and my hearing is starting to die out. I know a bunch of my friends who have good hearing, but not me. The only thing I can boast about my hearing is that I can hear really high frequency that no one in my family can hear.

I can't tell the difference between lossless and 320k mp3. I'm getting old and my hearing is starting to die out. I know a bunch of my friends who have good hearing, but not me. The only thing I can boast about my hearing is that I can hear really high frequency that no one in my family can hear.

Another half canine. We are doomed!!!

Strange to me how people get ***** with each other about this stuff. It's not a big deal, people can use whatever they're satisfied with. I go for lossless for a bunch of reasons, so if I can get that, I'm happy, and other people can use what they feel is enough for them. I'm certainly not going to complain if I can get an MP3 of something at a good bitrate, because it does get difficult to tell the difference, if at all (bitrates lower than 192 do really bother me though). I just download lossless if it's available.

EDIT: Haha, it censored me using the word cat-ty.

I think people just get annoyed when lossless formats are demanded and don't appreciate at all the work that was done to find, rip, and upload mp3's.

I think people just get annoyed when lossless formats are demanded and don't appreciate at all the work that was done to find, rip, and upload mp3's.

I've had that happen several times now, when I got the three most recent Sonic the Hedgehog game soundtracks at the beginning of the year. Each time I posted them, someone would tell me, "Hey, you should do lossless! It's better than your rip!" (Note that my album rips are always at 320 kb in .mp3) and completely ignore the fact that I just spent roughly $40 per album to give them something for free.

Obviously, I'm not looking for any sort of recognition, but it does get rather aggravating at how ungrateful some people are.

Obviously, I'm not looking for any sort of recognition, but it does get rather aggravating at how ungrateful some people are.

Then don't share your rips. It's as simple as that.

Then don't share your rips. It's as simple as that.

I think a better answer would be "Just don't complain. It's as simple as that."

I usually made lossless rips of my CDs for backup purposes. When it comes to listen I can't really tell a difference between a lossless encode and V0 .mp3 of the same file. Since I tend to keep files only to be able to listen them, lossless isn't worth the effort for me.

On a side note, people should really learn to be grateful that the stuff gets shared in the first place. Those who are getting something for free haven't got any right to complain about the format, in my book. While I do understand those who might want a lossless rip of an old album OOP, I can't help but to hate those who want lossless rips of recent releases, if you want proper quality go and buy the damn thing.... Websites like eBay can be useful if your favourite stores don't have what you're looking for.

if you want proper quality go and buy the damn thing....

Well said!!

Lawl, don't share my rips.

Or people can grow up a bit. Hmm.

I think a better answer would be "Just don't complain. It's as simple as that."

The only problem with that is people will always complain. If you don't share your rips or keep them private then that stops the problem right there.

People are asking for lossless not because they "complain", but they just want the best ,
especially if there's something they like.

If you upload to lossy, vbr v0 is a better choice than 320kps, "space wise".
Either you give away the full damn thing with lossless, or choose vbr , but 320kps is pointless IMHO.

.

it's not realistic to buy everything you like or would like to try out. and in the love of soundtracks, some cd's are stupidly priced because of rarity.
Of course it's not realistic to buy everything, that statement was mainly related to recent soundtrack releases. Albums stupidly priced because of rarity? I know that too well, I had to shell out 78$ to get an original copy of the Alundra Original Game Soundtrack in mint condition from a girl, lol......
About the "would like to try out" thing: go and listen to the .mp3(s), they're good enough for preview-purposes.
Lossy is always better than nothing and since many here are illegally getting the goodies for free...... Well, they don't have any right to demand proper quality rips, at least for me.

.

LOL. Wow, this thread sure turned around since last time I was here. I disagree with some of the comments here though. Why beat down on DXAshram? Although I prefer lossless, for myself, and had even made a request of DXAshram to upload in lossless as well, just a request, not a demand, I certainly didn't mind when he declined the...suggestion and I am very appreciative for what he, and all others who share music in the formats/bit rates that they're comfortable with, have shared with this community.

Although I don't visit this forum as often as I used to, I noticed a huge change in people's opinion of lossless. It used to be, back in the day, that virtually no one was interested in the format and, just like what's happening now but only the opposite, people would demand that those who uploaded in lossless formats also upload in MP3 format otherwise they were being "unfair" or making it "overly complicated".

Anyway, I thought that this thread was about sharing one's opinions, not warring about who should use what format, ect, ect.

It's all lies. It's a cover up by kevkhalee to have us humans battle against each other, and have the half canines strike without notice.

Hitoshura save us all!

clearly you know more than trent reznor about audio engineering.
And what's that supposed to mean?

My opinion is that is worth depending on what you want to keep in Lossless, I mean a NES soundtrack in Lossless is pretty stupid to me, the sound won't change, but if it's a full orchestra soundtrack, now that's worth have in Lossless... It's just the way I think of it. Maybe when I get a bigger Hard Disk, I'll have my library of Lossless music. But right now it's not a essential to me. Since I have a small Hard Drive (80gb)

@topopoz

I mean a NES soundtrack in Lossless is pretty stupid to me
I'm stupid to want even this I guess. I exaggerate.


Since I have a small Hard Drive (80gb)
Buy a new one , seriously. What's the point of a 80gb hard drive, when you can find 1.5To available ?

I mean a NES soundtrack in Lossless is pretty stupid to me, the sound won't change

check out rockman: chiptuned.

@topopoz

Buy a new one , seriously. What's the point of a 80gb hard drive, when you can find 1.5To available ?

Maybe that's all he has...some people don't have 80-150 bucks for a 1.5 TB drive.

@topopoz

Buy a new one , seriously. What's the point of a 80gb hard drive, when you can find 1.5To available ?


Maybe that's all he has...some people don't have 80-150 bucks for a 1.5 TB drive.

I have a PC with IDE hard disk, 256 RAM DDR 1 (not II) & AMD Sempron that my mother buyed a few years back, everything is SATA now and I don't have the money to buy a new Computer right now, Our beloved governors here in Argentina put new Taxes to tech products, so next month things will get even tougher to buy. I would buy a new PC if I could, but given the circumstances....

@topopoz
What about an external drive with an USB connection ? (I hope you have at least an USB 2 connection).
I have currently an external drive (western digital) of 500 gb.
Very slim (you can almost put it on your pocket) , lightweight, no adaptator required. This is better than doing a backup on multiple DVD.
And if I got more money, I would probably buy an other one.


Our beloved governors here in Argentina
Don't cry for me, Argentinaaaa (couldn't resist , sorry)

@topopoz
What about an external drive with an USB connection ? (I hope you have at least an USB 2 connection).
I have currently an external drive (western digital) of 500 gb.
Very slim (you can almost put it on your pocket) , lightweight, no adaptator required. This is better than doing a backup on multiple DVD.
And if I got more money, I would probably buy an other one.


Don't cry for me, Argentinaaaa (couldn't resist , sorry)

XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

Even if he could afford it, he wouldn't gain anything over good lossy encodings.

No.
I cannot hear a difference over 320 kbps - well, sometimes but almost never.

I download FLAC or disc images and then convert them down to 320 for my collection. 320 bitrate is plenty enough to satisfy my quality needs for any of my playing devices.