Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The DifferenceAudible?
Arny,
Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? -- % Randy Yates % "Watching all the days go by... %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % Who are you and who am I?" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Mission (A World Record)', %%%% % *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message
Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message
Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message
Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message
Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in message ...
Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in message ...
Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in message ...
Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in message ...
Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Svante, what do you teach?
"Svante" wrote in message om... Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Svante, what do you teach?
"Svante" wrote in message om... Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Svante, what do you teach?
"Svante" wrote in message om... Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Svante, what do you teach?
"Svante" wrote in message om... Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Charles Tomaras" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. -- % Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Charles Tomaras" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. -- % Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Charles Tomaras" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. -- % Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Charles Tomaras" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. -- % Randy Yates % "Ticket to the moon, flight leaves here today %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % from Satellite 2" %%% 919-577-9882 % 'Ticket To The Moon' %%%% % *Time*, Electric Light Orchestra http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Arny Krueger" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. Thanks Arny. I cannot, even with the proported "difficult" jangling keys passage - I suppose I'm just getting old. -- % Randy Yates % "She's sweet on Wagner-I think she'd die for Beethoven. %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % She love the way Puccini lays down a tune, and %%% 919-577-9882 % Verdi's always creepin' from her room." %%%% % "Rockaria", *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Arny Krueger" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. Thanks Arny. I cannot, even with the proported "difficult" jangling keys passage - I suppose I'm just getting old. -- % Randy Yates % "She's sweet on Wagner-I think she'd die for Beethoven. %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % She love the way Puccini lays down a tune, and %%% 919-577-9882 % Verdi's always creepin' from her room." %%%% % "Rockaria", *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Arny Krueger" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. Thanks Arny. I cannot, even with the proported "difficult" jangling keys passage - I suppose I'm just getting old. -- % Randy Yates % "She's sweet on Wagner-I think she'd die for Beethoven. %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % She love the way Puccini lays down a tune, and %%% 919-577-9882 % Verdi's always creepin' from her room." %%%% % "Rockaria", *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
"Arny Krueger" writes:
"Randy Yates" wrote in message Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? As a rule, its possible to hear at last slight differences, especially if you pick the music to exploit the failings of the coder. Thanks Arny. I cannot, even with the proported "difficult" jangling keys passage - I suppose I'm just getting old. -- % Randy Yates % "She's sweet on Wagner-I think she'd die for Beethoven. %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % She love the way Puccini lays down a tune, and %%% 919-577-9882 % Verdi's always creepin' from her room." %%%% % "Rockaria", *A New World Record*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
(Svante) writes:
Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. -- % Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow, %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your %%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow." %%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
(Svante) writes:
Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. -- % Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow, %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your %%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow." %%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is TheDifference Audible?
(Svante) writes:
Randy Yates wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. -- % Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow, %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your %%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow." %%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... "Charles Tomaras" writes: "Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. While I can appreciate the accuracy of blind testing, I recently heard someone post on a newsgroup that you don't need a blind comparison test to tell the difference between vodka and water. I'm sorry if one cannot hear the difference between Redbook CD and 128kbps material compressed with the popular codecs.....I think it's as obvious as the water and vodka analogy. When you get up to 192kbps and above the differences are much less pronounced but at 128kpbs it's not even close. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... "Charles Tomaras" writes: "Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. While I can appreciate the accuracy of blind testing, I recently heard someone post on a newsgroup that you don't need a blind comparison test to tell the difference between vodka and water. I'm sorry if one cannot hear the difference between Redbook CD and 128kbps material compressed with the popular codecs.....I think it's as obvious as the water and vodka analogy. When you get up to 192kbps and above the differences are much less pronounced but at 128kpbs it's not even close. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... "Charles Tomaras" writes: "Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. While I can appreciate the accuracy of blind testing, I recently heard someone post on a newsgroup that you don't need a blind comparison test to tell the difference between vodka and water. I'm sorry if one cannot hear the difference between Redbook CD and 128kbps material compressed with the popular codecs.....I think it's as obvious as the water and vodka analogy. When you get up to 192kbps and above the differences are much less pronounced but at 128kpbs it's not even close. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
"Randy Yates" wrote in message ... "Charles Tomaras" writes: "Randy Yates" wrote in message ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Doesn't take special tests to hear the difference at 128kbps for any of the codecs that I have heard. The differences are pretty obvious to most astute listeners even on moderately priced equipment. As a jazz fan I really hear it on the high end of cymbals with swirly sort of phase issues. This is exactly the sort of unscientific assertion I wanted to circumvent by my ABX-qualified question. While I can appreciate the accuracy of blind testing, I recently heard someone post on a newsgroup that you don't need a blind comparison test to tell the difference between vodka and water. I'm sorry if one cannot hear the difference between Redbook CD and 128kbps material compressed with the popular codecs.....I think it's as obvious as the water and vodka analogy. When you get up to 192kbps and above the differences are much less pronounced but at 128kpbs it's not even close. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in :
(Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in :
(Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in :
(Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
Randy Yates wrote in :
(Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. r -- Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:11:03 -0000, Rich Andrews
wrote: Randy Yates wrote in : (Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. That it is lossy compression, and therefore *measurably* diffferent, does not mean that it's *audibly* different. Only *listening* tests, under controlled conditions, can determine audibility. General repoirts seem to indiucate that 128kbs is audible, but 192 may be adequate for all but the most critical applications. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:11:03 -0000, Rich Andrews
wrote: Randy Yates wrote in : (Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. That it is lossy compression, and therefore *measurably* diffferent, does not mean that it's *audibly* different. Only *listening* tests, under controlled conditions, can determine audibility. General repoirts seem to indiucate that 128kbs is audible, but 192 may be adequate for all but the most critical applications. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Question to Arny Krueger: 128 kbps MP3 Vs. CD - Is The Difference Audible?
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:11:03 -0000, Rich Andrews
wrote: Randy Yates wrote in : (Svante) writes: Randy Yates wrote in message news: ... Arny, Given a relatively good MP3 encoder, has any of your ABX testing been able to quantify whether or not people can reliable detect the difference between a CD recording and 128 kbps MP3? Pardon me for responding to a question not directed to me, but I think I have some input to this. I have a group of undergraduate students every year that perform A/B testing on mp3 compression. Their task is to find compressors on the web, rip a few CDs of their choice and to run A/B testing with a software supplied by me. The software randomises the testing, so they can do it without too big risk of errors. I am not present during the tests, however. 99% confidence is required (7 correct responses of 7 tries or equivalent). Last year the students tested three encoders. According to their report they tested Lame, bladeenc and mpegenc. They tested 8 CDs. At 128 mbit/s and with the lame encoder they managed to detect 3 of these 8. Same number for the other two encoders was 7 of 8. At 160 mbit/s they still got 99% confidence for 1 of 8 with lame, 2 of 8 with bladeenc, and 5 of 8 for mpegenc. Now, this is a student report, so I would not take it as 100% certainly true, but the blinded A/B procedure makes the test reasonably well controlled. Svante, by all means, I appreciate your response. This is good information. Even at 320kc the MP3 is audibly different. It cannot help but be different. It is a lossy compression. That it is lossy compression, and therefore *measurably* diffferent, does not mean that it's *audibly* different. Only *listening* tests, under controlled conditions, can determine audibility. General repoirts seem to indiucate that 128kbs is audible, but 192 may be adequate for all but the most critical applications. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Magazine Statitistics | Audio Opinions | |||
Memo to Krooborg | Audio Opinions | |||
How many people listen to FM ? | Audio Opinions | |||
Repost: Reason 2.0 on a Celeron 2GHz laptop. | General | |||
Repost: Reason 2.0 on a Celeron 2GHz laptop. | Audio Opinions |