Are people still having storage size issue, download speed issues etc?
I only upload my rips in lossy format for the convenience of shorter download times. I believe the arguments years ago for lessening file size for storage and download times. But it is 2021 now and I am wondering if these stuff still matter to you:
Yes
No
0voters
For reference a normal album in 320 is about ~100 MB. In WAV/FLAC it is about 350-400 MB. Download speed for me is about 1 min for a 320 album and a few more minutes for lossless album.
I’ve fast internet speed so I don’t care about filesize much…
however stuff takes space so I prefer not to download lossless. but well after all I don’t care much.
I don’t really hear differences between 320 and lossless therefore I prefer 320 for storage reasons. I’m only taking lossless stuff for few bands when stuff is really important to me. But to try out new bands when stuff only gets upped in lossless I don’t take that.
I only save up 320kbps files or lower (VBR V0/256kbps or 192kbps).
I prefer to have space as I keep stuff on my laptop without an external drive atm, so lossy it is.
Besides I don’t really hear much difference so it’s no issue ^^
As much as my Internet speed is quite decent I go for MP3 320 kbps. Not only the sound is decent, it reduces the chance of my phone and PC of getting clogged
i don’t have much preference either way really. I don’t bother with super high quality headphones or speakers so the increased quality is lost on me, even though I don’t have issues with speed or space.
When I have a choice between lossless and 320 kbps I chose the later. I don’t hear much difference and I still have some old habits from times when I had much less storage space on my laptop/external drive.
lossless rulez. lossy format except qaac m4a is non-existent for me. so I don’t care about the file size if you manage to provide the proper rip, I just appreciate your hard work and put them carefully in my archive.
but,
the file size of my material for the upcoming exam matters (2G of pdf+txt, all written in Chinese, can you imagine?)
5 days left, gotta go, sigh
does sound quality really matter given that we stan girlies recording in derelict studios with tin can drums and abusing the fuck of cheap synth on top of that?..
320 works well enough for me, I can’t hear the difference between 320 and lossless and my library is way too big as is. I’ll take lossless if it is all that’s available but 320 kbps is my pref.
IIRC the only real way to notice a difference between FLAC and high-quality MP3 (320kbps) is if you have a proper audiophile set-up. However, the difference between FLAC and a poor quality MP3 can be noticeable, especially if it’s under 128kbps. That being said, the biggest difference is always in the original master’s production quality and considering that VK’s trademark is lo-fi production (in general, there are always, always exceptions) I think it’s kinda pointless stressing over lossless when some bands and labels (looks Kiwamu’s way) have masters that sound like they were recorded on a gaming headset mic.
I’m not picky over 320 vs FLAC and accept rips in both formats. I have enough space and download speed to manage FLAC, but if I had both options I guess I’d go for 320. I try not to be picky about MP3 under 320 if I’m e-begging or if it’s hard to find/rare. I offer FLAC rips of my physical stuff to the fans that care because I don’t mind going the extra mile if it makes someone with a better audio setup than me smile.
I probably should have clarified this question is more of a hardware/tech question. Storage is quite cheap nowadays and from my understanding most countries have access to higher download speeds than before. I was wondering if that was still a problem for some folks.
IMO lossless is the way to go just due to technological advancements. If storage is an issue then you can just convert to the desired bit rate and delete the lossless copy afterwards.
I guess I will continue upping in lossy format. My uploads are available in lossless as well if requested.
Massive necrobump because I would have made a thread about this if I didn’t see the thread. I don’t mean to sound like I have an issue with lossless but this is just my view.
I’m a Hifiman Sundara user and always preferred 192-KBPS-320KBPS and have been wondering why it seems super common for people to prefer to rip in FLAC now when it just grossly increases the file size for seemingly no reason worthwhile.
This is because the vast majority of people will never be able to detect a difference between 320KBPS and lossless and are basically 99% of the time experiencing a placebo effect at best.
Let’s suppose you have one of the best headphones and best DAC in the world. Let’s suppose you have a very well trained ear, and let’s assume you have the knowledge of what sort of distortion to look out for. Even despite all these factors you probably won’t be able to detect any difference at all unless you’re repeating short samples over and over again.
So you basically end up with an absurdly large file size with little to no detectable difference in sound quality, and less cross compatability between sound devices and apps.
I could only assume that lossless formats appeal to people for collection purposes or because of that nice feeling of having the best rip possible?? If so I can understand it.
But if I had an option between let’s say: 128KBPS, 192KBPS, 320KBPS and Lossless I would personally just go with 320KBPS as I find it to be a good enough middleground between quality and size and I don’t have to convert it in any applications.
