Any good digital music stores out there with lossless formats?
33 replies, posted
Hey everyone I'm looking for a decent online music service that carries music in lossless format. I need something that would have a decent selection of music ranging from a lot of classical music to metal and rock.
[url]http://magnatune.com/[/url] ?
[QUOTE=shaunyboyy;24569126][url]http://magnatune.com/[/url] ?[/QUOTE]
Pretty limited selection but thank you
Physical copies. :downs:
Hahahah that's always the best option but unfortunately I'm at college with no car. I need lots of music to help stimulate my growth here my professor wants me to listen to at minimum 2 classical guitar albums a week so ordering stuff kinds sucks.
Try vinyl :smug:
If you don't have the money to buy CDs then I doubt you own audio equipment sophisticated enough to be able to tell the difference between lossless and lossy compression. If I remember correctly most people can't tell the difference past 256kbps.
Need to understand audiophiles.
They have different EARS to everyone else.
[QUOTE=Akayz;24584659]Need to understand audiophiles.
They have different EARS to everyone else.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I've never really understood audiophiles. I bought an album recently which came on CD as well as with a download in FLAC format. I ripped the CD as Mp3 and compared the two and the difference wasn't huge.
Audiophiles generally listen to music that has been produced at a very high level of quality. I bet you a tonne, that their listening ranges go beyond this forum.
Audiophiles spend 10s of thousands on equipment to get a textured and rich pure sound from the medium.
I doubt sound cards in generic computers are of true audio quality.
[QUOTE=Akayz;24586304]Audiophiles generally listen to music that has been produced at a very high level of quality. I bet you a tonne, that their listening ranges go beyond this forum.
Audiophiles spend 10s of thousands on equipment to get a textured and rich pure sound from the medium.
I doubt sound cards in generic computers are of true audio quality.[/QUOTE]
Hmm I can't tell if you're serious or not.. :crossarms:
[QUOTE=Rad McCool;24586318]Hmm I can't tell if you're serious or not.. :crossarms:[/QUOTE]
:smugdog:
[QUOTE=Akayz;24586304]Audiophiles generally listen to music that has been produced at a very high level of quality. I bet you a tonne, that their listening ranges go beyond this forum.
Audiophiles spend 10s of thousands on equipment to get a textured and rich pure sound from the medium.
I doubt sound cards in generic computers are of true audio quality.[/QUOTE]
audiophiles are literally sub human trash
[url]http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/300753/stillpoints-ers-cloth-works#post_3934105[/url]
don't be this guy; buy consumer grade audio equipment for life
I love it when they call Digital formats "Plastic" compared to analogue.
:v:
Classics:
[url="http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/calling-bullshit/james-randi-offers-1-million-if-audiophiles-can-prove-7250-speaker-cables-are-better-305549.php"]James Randi Offers $1 Million If Audiophiles Can Prove $7250 Speaker Cables Are Better.[/url]
[url="http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15412&postcount=28"]Audiophiles can't tell the difference between a Monster 1000 cable and a simple coat hanger.[/url]
[url="http://nigelcoldwell.co.uk/audio/"]Do a blind test yourself![/url]
I personally couldn't tell the difference between the 64 kbps and the lossless one. :angel:
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;24586116]Yeah, I've never really understood audiophiles. I bought an album recently which came on CD as well as with a download in FLAC format.[B] I ripped the CD as Mp3 and compared the two and the difference wasn't huge[/B].[/QUOTE]
That's because it also depends on what medium you're listening to it, and the quality of said medium.
Also, [URL]http://www.junodownload.com/[/URL] is pretty decent imo. It's mostly synth- and drum-based music though.
[b]Edit:[/b]
@ CoolCorky: not saying that there really [b]is[/b] that much of a difference though. But some people say they can't hear a difference between a 320 and 128kbps version of the same song; when it's really just a matter of the frequency range of your speakers/headphones imo (as in, I hear a big difference in quality).
[QUOTE=Akayz;24587191]I love it when they call Digital formats "Plastic" compared to analogue.
:v:[/QUOTE]
I love how they seem to think digital is inferior to analogue, it's amazing considering a digital signal can be weak as hell and still work perfectly where as an analogue signal suffers for it :v:
I think most people who try to divulge in high grade audio are just kidding themselves...
I collect vinyl because i think playing it is a much more fulfilling experience, than to scroll an ipod.
Only on certain occasions are they superior to mp3 because they are mastered better.
For example, when an album is recorded in analogue, it would sound better on an analogue format.
But nowadays the arguement is just about how great your equipment is :frog:
Should have mentioned that the amount of (mostly) higher frequencies are audibly lessened/cut when you reach 128kbps or less. So it isn't actually that uncommon being unable to hear a difference in quality when compared to a higher bitrate, [i]as long as the track doesn't have a lot of loud higher hz's[/i]
I have seen cd trend diagram thingy, and it does cut off well below vinyls, but it ain't the point.
It is all about the mastering.
I personally can tell the difference in sound below 192kbps, depending on the album.
[editline]02:30PM[/editline]
here is an example of a shit comparison.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEq3Z-Bfv18[/media]
:doh:
What would happen if you properly converted the flac to mp3? It would sound the same...
Even on youtube.
[QUOTE=Tabarnaco;24570218]Physical copies. :downs:[/QUOTE]
It's the only way.
[QUOTE=Ralbane;24587024]audiophiles are literally sub human trash
[url]http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/300753/stillpoints-ers-cloth-works#post_3934105[/url]
don't be this guy; buy consumer grade audio equipment for life[/QUOTE]
Man that's a lot of toilet paper
Don't read this if you're planning to do the blind test!
Awesome, did that blind test, File #3 was obviously the worst, but then I listened to File #4, which for some reason I thought was slightly better than the others I listened to.
Believe me, I couldn't tell the difference between File #1, #2, and #4, but #4 in my ears felt like it had... more. And I was correct. I can now be called pretentious douchebag #102042310
[QUOTE=Tabarnaco;24575429]If you don't have the money to buy CDs then I doubt you own audio equipment sophisticated enough to be able to tell the difference between lossless and lossy compression. If I remember correctly most people can't tell the difference past 256kbps.[/QUOTE]
I can hear the difference between 256kbps MP3 and FLAC, but yes, only higher end speakers will really show up differences.
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;24586116]Yeah, I've never really understood audiophiles. I bought an album recently which came on CD as well as with a download in FLAC format. I ripped the CD as Mp3 and compared the two and the difference wasn't huge.[/QUOTE]
There's isn't a huge difference between 320kbps Mp3's and Flac files, and honestly most speakers won't show the difference anyway.
I can pretty clearly hear difference between my lossless and 320 rips. I mean it's not a huge deal but it's nice, at least if you have the space for it.
[QUOTE=Vedicardi;24617192]I can pretty clearly hear difference between my lossless and 320 rips. I mean it's not a huge deal but it's nice, at least if you have the space for it.[/QUOTE]
Likely to be placebo
CBR is lame, V0 is the way to go
MP3 is lame. :v: If you're gonna use a lossy format, go with AAC.
To the OP, you're better ordering CDs off of Amazon. Anyway.
I was mixing an album and doing the usual exports to mp3 (320kbps) to track my progress. Eventually I got to the point where I wanted to burn it to a CD so I exported it as a WAV and oh my gosh I was freaked out. I could hear so so much more that was wrong with the song. The MP3 versions sounded excellent, but only because of the lower bit depth. They cut a ton out, so then I found myself having to go back and fix all of the issues that I could hear with the WAV version because there was so much more to it. That being said, MP3 actually made my songs sound better, but it was because it didn't have anywhere near the detail that the uncompressed WAV file had. Morale of the story there is to not base the quality of your mix off an MP3.
Something that needs to be brought up into the lossless vs. compressed discussion is classical music. Classical music at low compression just doesn't work because it is genre that has a lot of diversity in tone and a lot of changes in volume. The majority of other genres aren't as dependent on volume and there isn't a need to diversify instruments. A rock or pop song will probably sound the relatively the same at different encoding rates, this is because there is probably a max of 6 different instruments playing so it becomes easy to place these instruments in the spectrum and the issue of masking isn't that great.
Now with classical music, there is a much wider use of volume which would mean there would be more of a need for bit depth. But it goes further than that. Many of the instruments will lose their tonality at lower bit rates. You'll still be able to hear what is happening with the music and get the gist of what the instrument are doing, but it will sound as muddy as heck. The ability to tune into one type of instrument and hear exactly what it is doing will be lost.
To summarize my point, a lot of music doesn't need to be lossless because there isn't that much going on with volume and because there instruments are less prone to mask at lower qualities. But there are certain kinds of music where it lossless is far more preferred because of these kinds of music are very much affected by the lower qualities.
Also, mastering engineers have incredible ears when it comes to audio. We really can't compare our ears with theirs because they are able to notice very very small differences.
[QUOTE=Pepin;24631282]
Also, mastering engineers have incredible ears when it comes to audio. We really can't compare our ears with theirs because they are able to notice very very small differences.[/QUOTE]
Not all are.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.