Well, from Spotify free is one thing, but it's quite hard to tell the difference between Spotify premium and FLAC.

See for yourself: http://abx.digitalfeed.net/spotify-hq.html

Actually, I tried Spotify premium, as well as Tidal, I even tried to A-B test them, with scarce results (couldn't notice any differences) . Then I tried my first proper flac downloads, 16 bit 44.1khz, and NOW I can really hear a difference. Songs I've listened on all platforms imaginable now have something like 50% more information in them, and everything has this sort of holographic/real feel to it, what I notice the most is the decay of sounds being so much more correct, the way the trail is still percievable even through other sounds.

I have a feeling that Tidal "high-res" isn't really the same as downloaded flacs, I'm not sure what's the weak link in the chain here (audio processing, actual bitrate due to internet connection or whatnot) but at least to me personally they don't sound the same, and I must admit that my first experiences with high res music made me very skeptical about the whole thing, and I was sure that 320mbps mp3 were all I ever needed. But now, I downloaded some new music, and some (only some) songs actually sound so much better, other sound the same (I've noticed some songs from Billie eilish in my library sound mostly the same between Spotify free and flac, go figure, maybe it's the files though)

What I've also noticed is that the first thing that's apparent is not the difference in detail/information quantity, it's the dynamics. On my phone, I thought that flacs sounded louder, then I noticed it's not that. They sound both louder and quieter, when the music calls for it. I think that has to do with the bit depth, and from what I've heard (still personal opinion) even tidal doesn't have the same bit depth of 16bit flacs, though I still need to do more testing. For now, I feel like I'm enjoying music for the first time again, and I'm just overwhelmed lol

How are you listening to the Flac files?

I'm using my phone (poco x3 pro) with an avani dongle (alc5686 chip) and at the moment a pair of ve monk plus, that's been my most favorite combo lately, but I usually also use my Moondrop aria, with which I still have to test the high res files though. I use my phone's default music app. Occasionally I use eq through wavelet, but lately I've been listening to my monk plus just stock. I also have to newly test my ksc75, though I usually eq them to add a bit more bass, and I'm still not sure of how eq affects the sound from a non-tuning point of view, especially since wavelet is not parametric and I use autoeq presets

From what I understand, mainstream record label music (Billie Eilish) is mastered with compression in mind. They know people are listening over the radio and over 128kbps streaming, and so they compress it down right from the start, so that the music holds up well.

What kind of music is giving you the noticeable improvement with FLAC? Is it poppy mainstream tracks, or something like classical/jazz that’s a bit more audiophile oriented?

It's actually music from an Italian indie rock band, that I previously thought to be badly mastered because it didn't sound the best compressed, now instead it sounds like a breath of fresh air hahah

I also have some classical music in my library, but I still have to properly test it lol, I also expect it to sound much better than the Spotify albums I've heard

Also if what you said about mainstream record labels is true, it's a shame since some of Billie eilish's recordings actually sound so skillfully mixed, I would love to hear more detail in them, even though I feel like they are capable of sounding pretty good even just on Spotify, so I actually agree that it may be as you say

I finally tried the block button, coming from reading posts like this for a lifetime. I just can't go back anymore.

Honestly, I'd say it isn't as hard as Spotify wants you to believe. Online A/B(/X) tests like that one are also flawed for a number of reasons (for one, the selection of music samples is limited and doesn't accurately reflect what the user listens to).

Oh boy you're gonna catch some flac/k here but DLtBGYD. Yes there can be a difference between lossy and lossless track but you may be hearing a difference in mastering. For me the Mix/Master>lossless/lossy>any codec/format "benefit". Maybe dial back the hyperbole and enjoy those lossless tunes. I am with ya there is no sense in discarding (perhaps worthless) data these days... lossless is cheap and readily available.

Just 500$ ? I thought your 10$ monk would have started to sound like the susvara at $6000. Shame.

To clarify, the link above isn't sponsored by Spotify - it's independent. They have ABX tests for Tidal as well.

Also, musical taste shouldn't have any bearing on sound quality comparisons.

The difference you are noticing is almost certainly due to a combination of differences in your audio chain, volume disparities, along with a smattering of expectation bias.

If you really want to see if the flac files you downloaded sound better than lossy:

• Install Foobar2000 and the ABX plugin
• Add your flac files and then right click > convert them to >256kbps AAC/MP3
• Add the new lossy files to your playlist and select the flac version + lossy version together.
• Run those through the ABX comparision tool, do about 10-20 tries

I was also convinced that FLAC sounded "richer" before I actually tested it out, but afterwards my illusions were shattered.

[deleted]

🤡

If placebo works it works

> Also, musical taste shouldn't have any bearing on sound quality comparisons.

It definitely does. Classical music and EDM, for example, have very different instruments and production methods, and some things you can hear in classical will respond to compression differently from things you can hear in EDM.

That's true, but that's not what you said before.

Your previous comment said

>and doesn't accurately reflect what the user listens to

Implying that a lack of familiarity with the tracks being tested might have a significant effect.

FWIW though, I would agree that the best way to ABX is to do your own conversion from lossless to lossy locally and use an offline ABX tool.

> Implying that a lack of familiarity with the tracks being tested might have a significant effect.

I never said that this was false, because it is also true. You know that feeling when you notice a detail in a song that you had never noticed before, even though you've listened to the song many times? Maybe that detail sounds better when it's lossless.

> FWIW though, I would agree that the best way to ABX is to do your own conversion from lossless to lossy locally and use an offline ABX tool.

This I agree, and with this method (using mostly /r/symphonicmetal which I normally listen to) I get consistently better results than the pre-made tests.

I believe 100% it could be placebo, I'm just reporting my experience lol

I will, but I mostly started using flacs instead of streaming to actually listen to my music even when offline, so even if I don't notice any differences I probably will still be using flacs, my music is worth sacrificing a couple gb on my phone lol

enlighten me if I'm wrong but 16bit is 16bit right? there can not be more bit depth if there aren't any more bits.