I'd love that.

Also:
Wishlist: Lossless soundtrack if possible
Wishlist: Add FLAC (or other lossless formats) as a soundtrack option

Well if they got their hands on lossless and/or HQ soundtracks and then mp3ed them at 128, I guess they should replace the soundtracks with the higher quality and or lossless versions (I mean file size doesn't really matter anymore in the modern internets). Otherwise I don't really see this happening, even if I think it would be very cool.

Also, I have noted differences between lossless (wav to be precise) and mp3, but It was weird 'cause it sounded different but not in that one was better than the other, juts in that it was... different. I wasn't doubleblinding though.

No, those tests were conducted with professional violinists. Under double-blind conditions they cannot reliably identify Stradivarius violins against modern instruments. If asked for a preference, the musicians actually tend to like the sound of the new instruments better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_preferences_among_new_and_old_violins

Lol nice experiment. But yes for sure ... DJing is my hobbie and I can't make diff between FLAC & 320 kbps track...

It really depends on the music you listen to. Dance music usually undergoes extreme audio compression to level out volumes and make it loud, so you won't hear much of a difference. More open sounding music with more high-end (some jazz and older non-compressed recordings) will start to pick up digital artifacts quicker, especially cymbals and ride cymbals in particular. It will vary per song.

I have never tried to test myself with FLAC vs 320 though. For most purposes 320 should be OK. I know 192 is acceptable as long as you don't intend to actually listen to the music. :)

I still like tube amps, although the proper amount of natural reverb will compensate. My band played in the open court of what was essentially an abandoned (there were about 2 stores open) two-story mall and the sound was just incredible. You'd never know that my amp was some 60 W Lab Series from back in the day. The room plays a huge difference.

I use to have a "hobby" of listening for all the background noise (studio chatter, etc) in recordings. I make no claims of being an audiophile though. My equipment is nowhere near high end.

Mm why do always put DJ's to dance music... I listen many diff genres ;) And trust me I can't make difference between a FLAC /320kbps Metallica album... the diff is just so small,that you can't make the difference.
Everything over 192kbps is ok (192 is for laptops/pc headphones...)

I know DJs do more than dance music. I was just choosing examples from extreme ends, one meant to be constantly loud and the other that has periods of soft. :)

DJ do more dance music,but they need to have good hearing for sounds... it is not only bass rhythm

As for Metallica, I think that would depend on the album. Weren't they the band that mixed their last album so that it sounded "good" on an iPod but then it sounded like crap on everything else? I don't remember which band it was...

EDIT: It was Metallica: http://www.applesource.com.au/ipod/soa/Metallica-and-the-iPod-are-dumbing-down-music/0,2000070791,339292065,00.htm

Yep compresing tracks is bad for sure... that's why I pointed that everything over 192 is ok,depending on the device you use. If you put a 192 kbps mp3 on a HarmanKardon system you will get the diff... it is not a big one...but you will get it

Right, but the compression they are talking about for that Metallica album is audio compression, not digital compression.

It is a digital mastering... that kills the audio quality if you screw it.
For instance: AC1 OST is VBR quality and sounds pretty good on my audio system. No distorsions,no issues at all. So far I haven't got any issues with soundtracks released by GOG... and I use a normal audio system,nothing fancy(Yeah I will definetly love a Harman Kardon 7.1 at my home....but the price is high for my wallet) :D

That will kill it also, yes, but I think on that particular album, it's the audio compression as well (compressed so much it distorts). I have not heard it and am only restating what others have told me.

After hearing some of my older MP3 songs as FLAC/Redbook, I never wanted MP3 again. Granted those were old, lower bitrate (192, 160, maybe even 128 *shutter*), so the comparison is VERY unfair. I'd have to give some GOG soundtracks a listen to see what I think.

The best version is always whatever you started with. I made some recordings using the RealAudio format (glad that died). Those recordings will (sadly) never be better than that.

If GOG was given 64 kbps MP3s (for example), then that's what they can give, but for CD rips, FLACs would be nice, even if the difference is only in our heads. :)

WMA Lossless. Most people don't have other players installed.
What kind of stuff do you play?