the anchors (low-high) to the right - and/or, indicate that LAME is 128 kbps
Roberto, can you please move the anchors (low-high) to the right - and/or, indicate that LAME is 128 kbps, otherwise the test graph results might be very misleading
The ironic part? Vorbis is my lossy codec of choice.
I obtained different results, with bad notation for vorbis (unfortunately, I forgot the matrix on another computer). I'm not at ease with vorbis at this bitrate during a blind test : it sounds too particular (hiss, desquilibrated tonal range : more treble, poor low-medium, and limited stereo), and it's easy for me to detect the encoder. I'm rating vorbis, and not an unknow encoder. So it isn't blind anymore.
Lower anchor was rarely the worse file I rated : on 8 files, I rated other encodings as worst one. I prefer an excessive low-passed sound without artefacts than a richer sound, but destroyed by flanging. Personal taste.
The group results seem to be:Lame > He AAC, MP3Pro, Vorbis (with He AAC > Vorbis) > Real, WMA, QT AAC > FhG.[...]Well, it's good to know that I agree with the majority .
With just five samples the scope for meaningful statistics is reduced, but we can say that you were probably able to detect Real, FhG MP3 and Vorbis from the original, and not able to detect AAC or MP3 Pro.
Does this mean that any codec producer who says "sounds as good as 128kbps mp3 at only 64kbps!" can now be taken to court for false advertising?
EDIT: Can hydrogen audio set up a directory of listening test results (with or without samples)? It would be useful to have them all in one place, and backed up for if/when other peoples servers go offline.What do other people think of this idea?Cheers,David.
I've been itching to discuss the test all weekend! Here are my results ranked by average score:1. Lame MP32. WMA Std3. LC AAC4. HE AAC5. Vorbis6. MP3 Pro7. FhG MP38. Real Audio GeckoLame was the winner by a large margin. Nothing was close to WMA for second place. Both AAC codecs and Vorbis were actually fairly close. A different set of samples could see them in a much different order. MP3 Pro and FhG MP3 were almost tied, the difference was very small. Real audio was a joke. Lost by a huge margin, even compared to 64k mp3.Other than Real, which lost on almost every sample, and Lame which won most samples, every codec had at least one sample where they fell near the bottom of the pile. Illinois and mybloodrusts turned out to have scores that differed wildly from all the other samples. Illinois in particular gave the second best rating to FhG MP3 and absolutely killed Vorbis. WMA fell to pieces on the piano sample (Polonaise) for some reason producing a bunch of nasty hissing noises.I'd confidently say that the claim that any of these perform as well as mp3 at half the bitrate is a BIG FAT LIE.
Also, how many participated? Ah.. between 26-43. Not a very large sample then.