ddmuse: Is the difference between FLAC and 320kbps mp3 perceivable?
Yes (with all the tracks I've tested anyway). In my experience, it's easiest heard when using hifi audio equipment and listening to the tracks in succession or while switching between them. The first thing I notice is that usually the bass sounds just sound different, but frankly I couldn't tell which one is which in most cases, they're just different. Sometimes the difference is clearer, and the instruments/sounds are easier to distinguish as sole components in the FLAC files.
I hear the program you use also affects which parts of the music the mp3 compression cuts out. Dunno if that's true, as I'd imagine they all use that same LAME (its name, not name calling) encoder thing or get sued to the max (this is "I guess" class information).
Anyway, it's a matter of taste/perversion if the slight difference in perceivable sound quality is worth the multiplication of the file size by a rational number greater than 2. I prefer FLAC myself and spend hours ripping a single cd to get those perfect, uncorrupted files.
There's also that thing that you can do whatever you want with the lossless files. You can burn a proper audio cd if that's what you fancy, or even compress it into those 320kbps mp3s. It adds to the
'tis mine, U no can tell me what to do sensation/experience.