A lossless format will (technically) result in better audio quality… but…
Audio quality is very subjective, take a dozen or so tracks typical of those you would encode. Encode each to various formats, then compare the results using whatever playback method(s) you would normally use. Do you hear a difference? If so, make your choice of encoder based upon that.
Are there other better lossless formats? Why? Thanks.
Too many variables. Not every mp3 is like the next one, CBR vs. VBR, ##kbps . Same goes for FLAC. I have hi-res FLACs that are > 400MB, but they’re 192KHz and come from SACD ( Super Audio CD ). What matters most is the firmware of the MP3 player, and whether it has the latest codecs. I’ve had devices that would play anything if MP3, others that played various formats, ogg FLAC mp3 mp4, but no 320kbps CBR mp3 …
IME FLAC quality beats mp3 by far fwiw.
The quality you hear will depend on the state of your ears and the devices producing the airwaves. The range of frequencies you can hear gradually declines with age; even an MP3 will sound better if the device creating the airwaves has a greater range because lower frequencies produce overtones which are added to the higher frequencies.
There is no point in using a lossless format if the source cannot produce high quality input or the output device cannot produce high quality output. But, if the source can produce high quality input, it is worth using a lossless format for the initial recording and archiving this and then using a compressed format for everyday use. I recommend ogg for Android devices. If you have home cinema surround sound, a lossless format will sound much better.
My experience has been that the quality of recordings is highly dependent on the skill of the people who originally recorded it. I have recordings from the 1960s where the quality is stunning and ones from this century where the quality is very lacking.