Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
From a simple, basic listening standpoint: The answer is no.
If you have the disk capacity the store multiple FLAC albums, then by all means do so. If space is an issue, then MP3s encoded with any recents version of LAME beyond 192kbps should be just fine - mostly.
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
I just bought a Astell & Kern AK100 II and Noble Audio Kaiser 10s and I can say for a fact that I just wasted three thousand dollars.
I'm now contemplating getting hypnotized into believing there's an appreciable difference so I won't feel so bad.
This is what is known as throwing good money after bad.:)
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
flac better of mp3, why more bitrate, and hearing better
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DitchCrew
ears of the beholder....
As far as one can observe with one's ears, yeah.
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
FLAC stands for Free Lossless Audio Codec, an audio format similar to MP3, but lossless, meaning that audio is compressed in FLAC without any loss in quality.
So there FLAC is better than MP3
Re: Is FLAC really "better" than high-bit rate MP3?
I always prefer lossless over lossy, when I have good equipment(not phone or realtek audio :happy: ).