iTunes AAC@256 vs 320 LAME: Different Experience? Options

[Antigen]

Hi to all,

actually I'm converting my CD to MP3@320 with the last version of LAME.

I have read that AAC from Apple @256 is a better solution for quality respect the LAME@320.

But it's real that AAC@256 can be better to 320 MP3?

I know, the only solution is ABX test, but in the real world, MP3 320 is worse respect to a 256 AAC?

Post here your experience, comparison and test if you have done.

Thanks for your collaboration

This post has been edited by Antigen: Jun 13 2012, 19:36

[greynol]

There are countless discussions as well as listening tests that indicate that either of the two candidates are overkill except for the tiny minority of people who are able to identify artifacts. I see no reason to think the author of this particular topic is one of them. If he was then he wouldn't be asking the question, especially not in the way that he did.

In the "real world" and especially in the "real world" the only acceptable means to determine whether one is better is through ABX and must be taken on a sample-by-sample basis. If differences can be detected and unless one is transparent then which is "better" becomes a matter of personal opinion, though since it is a matter of opinion maybe the non-transparent one is deemed "better."

As it is a personal opinion and because the bitrates are so high, I see little benefit in what others think unless there is broad consensus. Even still, how does that matter if the person doing the listening isn't able to distinguish a difference?

This post has been edited by greynol: Jun 13 2012, 22:39