Waiting clip in FLAC formatAt the moment he sings 'for any_th_ing at all', the 'th' is distorted. This is rather easily audible.mppenc 1.15rI tested standard, easily ABX-able. Xtreme is better, but I can still ABX it.
Ok it's audible but is it really horrible enough to call it a killer clip?
Wow, this one is tough for me to ABX. I have been listening to it for awhile now straight, I’m thinking the distortion is more noticeable in the right channel for some reason. Perhaps there is a channel separation problem during encoding? The guitar is louder on the left channel, but I notice the distortion on the right channel mostly. Let me know Garf is you notice this as well..
Anything I can ABX at standard is a killer clip in my book. MPC was designed not to be ABX-able at this setting.
That's why a lot of people chose to encode at extreme or insane : not really for transcoding or extreme samples, but for some hypothetical 'flaw' in the perfection of the mpc encoder.I found myself some passages I can ABX (less easily that Waiting) with some perseverance at standard, and not at higher setting (sometimes extreme solve it, sometime insane...). I never worried about them : --standard is standard, very high, though, but definitely standard. If you want more security, use mpc at 200-230 kbps ; a lot of people are doing it, and a lot of people are blaming them for it...
There is a blip in the right channel, this is what is distorded, isn't it ?
How about mppenc1.95z67 "post SV7 pre SV8" ? It seems to sound better.
Sometimes --xtreme will save your *ss, sometimes --insane does so. Sometimes nothing does. And in the meantime, you're using bits and bits and bits... It's like WavPack @ 400kbps. Sure, there's not much stuff you can ABX it on, but it's 2.5 times bigger than an MPC standard encode, and it's going to have failure cases as well.
Who cares about the bits and bits... really... It's not like you can take these "wasted" bits and save a few trees, significantly reduce greenhouse emissions or feed some starving children in a third world country. If an enthusiast is prepared to use the space for piece of mind, it's their choice.
As for Wavpack, I could list reasons why I use it, that have nothing to do with ABXing, and give multiple examples where it outperforms Vorbis, LAME and Musepack consistently, in my everyday usage, even when they are all used at a 320 kbit rate, but there is no need.
I'd actually like to see and hear the examples (clips =/= claims). I've never actually seen them. If they were in another thread, please point me in the right direction, thanks.There is relevance to this thread because I was actually comparing WavPack and MPC when I ABXed this sample. I could ABX WavPack @ 320 kbps on a reasonable amount of stuff (but not at 400kbps), and I couldn't ABX MPC --standard on most, with some exceptions, like this one.For me, this rules out WavPack for normal usage. I've seen several claims it's superior in transcoding, but I could not reproduce them so far, and as far as I know no concrete examples were ever given.
but if required, I can make up a sample or two and post them later.
I just wonder if I'd have ever spotted it in the first place in normal listening. I suspect not, though I'm a beginner.
I'm not sure if it's simply the noise that you're ABXing, Garf (possible since you say it's usually OK at 400 kbps)
Posted on Jun 12 2003 - 06:33 AM-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doesn't 132 Kbps ATRAC3, trash quality on difficult samples, by itself?