Skip to main content

Topic: Lame 3.95 vs 3.90.3 (Read 24051 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • Gecko
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Lame 3.95 vs 3.90.3
Reply #50
Tried one of my own samples at preset standard: "Cirillo - Cristallo" from the "Eye Trance 04" sampler. It has a relatively quiet section with sharp attacks which are slightly reverbed.

I blindly ranked 3951 lower but I later tried abxing it against 3903 without getting any significant results (I also felt like I was guessing). I stopped at 3/8.
3903.mp3 ... 635079 bytes
3951.mp3 ... 626224 bytes

Code: [Select]
ABC/HR Version 0.9b, 30 August 2002
Testname: cirillo lame aps test

1R = G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3951_dec.wav
2L = G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3903_dec.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments:

---------------------------------------
1R File: G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3951_dec.wav
1R Rating: 3.0
1R Comment: pre-echo worse than the other sample
---------------------------------------
2L File: G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3903_dec.wav
2L Rating: 4.0
2L Comment: pre-echo
---------------------------------------
ABX Results:
Original vs G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3951_dec.wav
   8 out of 8, pval = 0.004
Original vs G:\NewMP3s\lame-aps\cirillo\3903_dec.wav
   8 out of 8, pval = 0.004

[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']edit: was missing an "r"[/span]
  • Last Edit: 24 January, 2004, 08:37:56 AM by Gecko

Lame 3.95 vs 3.90.3
Reply #51
Quote
Testname: BeautySlept --preset standard

Where can I get the sample?
ruxvilti'a

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Lame 3.95 vs 3.90.3
Reply #52