ohbythebay
New member
- Thread Author
- #1
An interesting observation A/B testing
So you guys know I use XBOX music streaming on my tablet into my system (through a DAC)
Recently I posted how I used the (gag, ugg, can't say it) Apple service to "replace" a collection of MP3's I had (128kbps) with 256kbps AAC (Apple's A Clown) format. All kidding aside...I played both and tried some A/B testing
Well, the AAC files sound "dull" in comparison. Flat, no soundstage, like a veil over the files. So I am wondering, is WMA just a better format all around even at the lower bit rate ?
Thoughts on the lossy compression? Seems like the $24 for the year was not such a hot deal since they don't sound much different than my 128kbps MP3's
So you guys know I use XBOX music streaming on my tablet into my system (through a DAC)
Recently I posted how I used the (gag, ugg, can't say it) Apple service to "replace" a collection of MP3's I had (128kbps) with 256kbps AAC (Apple's A Clown) format. All kidding aside...I played both and tried some A/B testing
Well, the AAC files sound "dull" in comparison. Flat, no soundstage, like a veil over the files. So I am wondering, is WMA just a better format all around even at the lower bit rate ?
Thoughts on the lossy compression? Seems like the $24 for the year was not such a hot deal since they don't sound much different than my 128kbps MP3's