Even though you can’t tell the differences.

  • Jacob_1451@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I can tell the difference. Granted, I think it largely depends on the music compositions themselves.And even then, admittedly, it’s not a HUGE OMG WOW difference even when it’s FLAC. But it’s at the very least cleaner sounding IMO.

    • EvilSynths@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      No you can’t.

      I’d bet a lot of money that’s 100% placebo and you’d fail a frequency test.

      Most people can’t even tell the difference between regular lossless on a frequency test.

      Stop giving into your own placebo. You’re claiming you can tell a difference on music which was recorded on lower quality microphones than what you think you’re listening at

      Or are you a dog?

      • Jacob_1451@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I agree that anything beyond 44.1Khz isn’t able to be heard because that value DOES correlate to OBJECTIVE frequency ranges. That being said, what is the difference in larger kbps amounts with lossless doing then? Data degradation over long-term storage? stability of audio signal? I really do want to learn more about all this.

    • Regular-Cheetah-8095@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      You can’t even hear half of 44.1khz unless you’re not human. Differentiating bit rates above 16 require lab conditions, being a professional trained listener and being blasted with severe hearing damage levels of audio in 1-2 second snippets - That gets better than a coin flip. Sometimes. There is no exception to this. None. You do not hear anything different because it’s impossible. The human ear has limitations regarding frequencies and resolutions and these would be within those limitations.