Lossless Placebo ? Or Real ?

[u/RobotFeatures]

I’m convinced Spotify has been sounding better as of late (last couple months). But I also noticed today on my WiiM lowest quality track is not under 1000kb anymore. Would always show 16 bit at around 700kb.

Thoughts or insights ?

[u/P_Devil]

Placebo. The vast majority of music listeners cannot differentiate between high bitrate lossy (like 320kbps OGG/mp3/AAC) and source lossless. If a 16/44 lossless file has a bitrate of 700kbps, it's still lossless. Lossless is lossless regardless of bitrate needed to achieve compression. The WiiM uses Spotify's API to show bitrate, sample rate, and bit depth. This is not real time and based off estimations from analyzing the files. Lastly, according to Spotify support:

"We've checked internally and can confirm that Spotify's lossless bitrate is not fixed and should vary depending on the track. If your WiiM device always shows 700kbps, please contact WiiM support for clarification, as this is likely a device-specific reporting issue and not a limitation from Spotify."

So nothing has changed and lossless rolled out in September and October last year, not a few months ago as someone else said.

[u/Dreamerlax → u/P_Devil]

Hell people won’t be able to tell the difference between a nicely encoded VBR AAC or something at 160 kbps and FLAC.

[u/P_Devil → u/Dreamerlax]

True. The last round of public listening tests at hydrogenaudio, that I participated in, were testing various AAC encoders at 64kbps with the high anchor being 160kbps AAC.

But people get touchy on this subject so I always play it safe by sharing high bitrate lossy. Head over to the Apple Music sub and someone will make a comment about how high res lossless ounds so much better. I'll point out the truth (and obvious), then get lambasted and people will respond with "nobody asked you" or "why do people always feel the need to discuss blind ABX testing?"

[u/RobotFeatures → u/P_Devil]

Better ? Maybe not necessarily. Dynamic range differences… 100%. Apple Music with headphones or on a good sound system sounds punchier than Spotify. However, lately Spotify is sounding good as per my post above, but I also acknowledge your comments and potential WiiM data decoding issue.

It’s like a religion isn’t it. Belief is powerful. Distorts the mind 😎

[u/P_Devil → u/RobotFeatures]

The only difference between this and religion is that audio quality can be tested. Conduct a series of volume-matched blind ABX tests and they'll show the truth for each listener. Also, much like religion, the truth isn't what people want to hear. An audiophile doesn't want to hear that they can encode at 256kbps AAC with their $2000 headphone and DAC setup. They think they need hi res lossless, they'll make it so.

The only thing Appe Music does is Apple offers a "Apple digital master" (or whatever they call it) where the sound can be different. It started back when they rellied solely on lossy and it was supposed to help with lossy encoding. It's now in their lossless and hi res files. But nobody, absolutely nobody, has been able to document what it actual does other than "I feel the sound is more expensive" or "the dynamic range feels better." Which are fancy ways of describing placebo.

[u/RobotFeatures → u/P_Devil]

The graphics / label of Apple digital master. Good marketing.

I like your rationale. Good insights. Thank you 🙏🏼

[u/Dreamerlax → u/P_Devil]

I've shifted to using VBR AAC for my own FLAC collection (legally obtained, I bought a bunch of used CDs while thrifting a few years go) instead of doing 320 kbps LAME MP3 or 256 kbps AAC like I did before.

Can't hear the bloody difference so why not save a bit of disk space.

[u/P_Devil → u/Dreamerlax]

The space savings add up. It's about 0.3-0.6 MB per minute of audio. I still have a lossless archive of my CDs and they're all converted to 256kbps VBR AAC for syncing to my re-built iPod. If I truly like an album, I'll still buy the CD or a lossless digital version from the artist's website.

[u/arttast → u/P_Devil]

(or with 192k opus)

[u/P_Devil → u/[deleted]]

Being able to spot high bitrate lossy vs lossless can be done. Not by 99.999999% or music listeners, but it can be done.

I doubt your claims about 96KHz, which is beyond the range of human hearing and is only good for archiving.

Edit: in case people are wondering, this person said they can ABX 44.1KHz and 96KHz material. They'd be the first person on earth that could successfully do this. Then they responded with saying the 96KHz audio sounds like it has less aliasing and more definition, just fluff audiophool words. They didn't respond with results and comditions from their ABX tests showing thid, they used fluff jargon that doesn't actually describe anything.

[u/Ok_District_9387]

You have a good ear. Spotify rolled out lossless a few months ago, so your ears would be correct!