Anyone else use 320 kbps mp3's? Reply #25 – 2008-07-31 18:50:56 Not to beat a dead horse, but you have nothing to lose and everything to gain by doing a simple ABX test using foobar. The key concept i didn't see mentioned previously is that you should ensure you are testing using your own rips and using a current version of LAME (3.97 or the newly released 3.98) so you are comparing apples to apples. I think most people on this board could discern between a random 256 mp3 from somewhere (that may have been transcoded from a 128 original) and another 320 file from some other source. That is not surprising. Personally, i have fun doing ABX tests but i also enjoy dabbling with audio software and testing the abilities of different codecs. If it turns out you can't discern between 256 and 320 (or, say 128 and 320) you can potentially save alot of storage space on your portable device as well as your hard drive. If you aren't limited to MP3 you should check out AAC which yields pretty incredible detail at very low bitrates. On the other hand, if it turns out that you can reliably discern between say LAME 256 vs 320 or even 320 vs. lossless (as your first post states), you have exceptional hearing and can prove very valuable to this forum as well as the development of future codec releases. If you hadn't noticed (or searched at all) the developers of the LAME codec, the nero AAC codec and loads of lossless codecs are frequent posters here and actively seek input folks with exceptional hearing abilities. They are not here by accident, but more likely because this forum is more scientifically-oriented and not about dubious claims.