Lossless Audio

[DJ JJB]

I was just curious to see if anybody else on here bothers with lossless audio, whether that's WAV, Flac, Alac etc... and why? I decided to do it because a lot of my music was ripped in various difference bit rates years and years ago before i fully understood audio compression. At times I would be playing 128kbps songs and I could really tell that difference between my newer 320kbps songs. Some people would argue that it would be better to RIP and download music in 320kbps MP3 because you can't tell the difference between lossless and MP3. I had this opinion for a while but re-visiting this topic later on, I discovered that I could tell the difference between 320kbps MP3 and lossless. This was listening on cheap £20 earphones , so I could only imagine what I'm missing out on if I had some studio grade headphones. What's everybody's opinions?

[rth_discos]

128k MP3 is noticeable on speakers.

320k MP3 sounds absolutely fine on speakers.

Personally, I can't see the benefit in replacing all that music with lossless, when you consider the cost of re-acquiring that music and the time investment in doing it.

[Nakatomi]

Experience has shown me that the ultimate sound quality of a file relies as much on the source material as the final encoding format. For example, some WAVs I've bought from ILikeMusic sounded rank compared to other versions of the same track there & from elsewhere.

All my rips of original CDs which go way back are stored on my file server at home, which are all in FLAC format & backed up to 'the cloud'. I copy tracks to my playout in MP3 format but any special mixes or edits I do, get output as WAV or FLAC. This is to minimise generational losses accrued when decoding & re-encoding files.

My collection of custom edits is ever growing & it's a real labour of love making tracks fit my needs better. An example would be my 'dj edit' of 500 miles by the proclaimers... After hearing so many crowds go to the chorus too early so many times I decided to make them right

[rth_discos]

my 'dj edit' of 500 miles by the proclaimers... After hearing so many crowds go to the chorus too early so many times I decided to make them right

Damn, you're right. They do that every time, don't they!

[DJ JJB]

128k MP3 is noticeable on speakers.

320k MP3 sounds absolutely fine on speakers.

Personally, I can't see the benefit in replacing all that music with lossless, when you consider the cost of re-acquiring that music and the time investment in doing it.

That's very true. To be honest most people can't tell the difference between 320kbps and lossless audio. The only reason why I've decided to do it is because I'm not happy playing MP3's that are less than 320kbps and I thought if I'm going to get better quality audio files, I might as well make it lossless because I've got the storage to do so. Luckily my library isn't to big (just over 10,000 tracks) and I've got about 80 percent of the original albums stored away, so it should take too long to do.

Experience has shown me that the ultimate sound quality of a file relies as much on the source material as the final encoding format. For example, some WAVs I've bought from ILikeMusic sounded rank compared to other versions of the same track there & from elsewhere.

I've found that too with some of my duplicates. Same tracks but from two different places. One sounds better than the other, Even though they were both ripped in Alac.

[DeckstarDeluxe]

I'd say 95% of your files the average wedding crowd won't notice the difference between 128k and higher quality through your average run of the mill PA system.

It's a nightmare of job to go back and update them with the higher quality formats so if you're doing it then it'll be mainly for your own peace of mind and sanity. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I can't recall seeing anyone review myself or another DJ and comment on the quality of the audio itself (just mention good song selection).

Of course if you're doing large corporate jobs with line arrays and the such then it'll be far more noticeable.

Most of mine is 320k, nice medium between audio quality and disk space.

[DJ Jules]

I've been buying everything new via ilikemusic as .wav files for a few years now, if only because it's cheaper than other sources. However, when I originally ripped my CD collection I did it at 192kbps and there are still a handful of these tracks that get played every now and then and the difference is definitely audible. I've been slowly rebuying these as .wav files as and when I come across them.

Julian

[DJ JJB]

I'd say 95% of your files the average wedding crowd won't notice the difference between 128k and higher quality through your average run of the mill PA system.

It's a nightmare of job to go back and update them with the higher quality formats so if you're doing it then it'll be mainly for your own peace of mind and sanity. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I can't recall seeing anyone review myself or another DJ and comment on the quality of the audio itself (just mention good song selection).

Of course if you're doing large corporate jobs with line arrays and the such then it'll be far more noticeable.

Most of mine is 320k, nice medium between audio quality and disk space.

I totally agree that most people wouldn't be able to notice the difference and I've never had anyone comment on the quality of the music tracks either, so it does make me wonder why I'm bothering. I guess it really is for my own peace of mind and sanity It is very time consuming but I'm doing it bit by bit, prioritising what gets played the most. I'm not worried about disk space because storage is not expensive like it used to be. Some of my tracks will most likely stay 320kbps just due to the fact if would be too expensive to buy them all again.

[DJ JJB]

I've been buying everything new via ilikemusic as .wav files for a few years now, if only because it's cheaper than other sources. However, when I originally ripped my CD collection I did it at 192kbps and there are still a handful of these tracks that get played every now and then and the difference is definitely audible. I've been slowly rebuying these as .wav files as and when I come across them.

Julian

I had a feeling you'd be one of the DJ's that would bother doing this. I guess were both "fussy" when it comes to our music and have very high standards I didn't know about IlikeMusic so I will have to check them out.

[rth_discos]

One thing that puts me off is losing my 'history' from a song.

Play count is important to me.

Is there any way in Virtual DJ to replace a song (eg, a 192k MP3 with a 320k MP3) yet retain the song play history?