--r3mix 3.95 vs. 3.93, bigger files?
Reply #29 – 2004-02-12 11:46:53
Not to be contradictory or anything but I have seen the tests david speaks of they are around the web on some obscure mirror of the r3mix board. If you desire it enough it can be found. If you know where this is, please share! Google isn't my friend on this one! I've found the r3mix results quoted in my thesis - it's difficult to re-format them to post here, but... The tested encoders / settings are: lame 3.90a7 and MPEG+ (unknown version) 1. lame cbr192 MS GPSYCHO (192kbp) 2. lame abr224 MJ nspsytune nssafejoint (221.3kbps) 3. lame --r3mix (199.6kbps) 4. lame dm-xtr (231.8kbps) 5. MPEG+ insane -nmt99 -tns99 lowpass 19.5 (near lossless achor 740kbps) 6. lame dm-ins (272.8kbps) 7. lame cbr256 nspsytune nssafejoint (256kbps) 8. lame dm-std (221.9kbps)codec: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 result 01 4.0 4.5 4.1 4.5 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.3 result 02 3.7 3.9 4.0 4.2 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.7 result 03 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 04 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 result 05 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 06 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.7 result 07 3.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 08 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 09 3.3 4.0 3.3 3.0 5.0 3.2 3.8 3.5 result 10 4.0 4.4 4.5 4.2 4.7 4.3 4.6 4.1 result 11 3.7 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.7 3.7 5.0 result 12 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 result 13 4.4 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.9 5.0 4.6 5.0 result 14 4.0 3.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 result 15 2.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 16 3.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 5.0 result 17 3.5 4.0 4.7 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 result 18 3.5 4.0 3.5 5.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 result 19 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 20 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.7 4.6 4.1 4.4 4.5 result 21 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 22 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 23 4.2 3.8 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.3 4.2 result 24 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 25 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 5.0 4.8 4.8 result 26 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 27 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 28 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.9 result 29 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.9 result 30 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 result 31 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 32 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 result 33 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 34 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 35 4.5 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.4 4.2 5.0 result 36 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 result 37 4.3 5.0 4.8 4.8 5.0 4.7 5.0 4.7 result 38 4.9 4.5 4.6 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.5 result 39 5.0 4.8 4.6 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.7 result 40 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 result 41 3.4 4.2 3.5 4.4 3.9 3.7 4.0 4.5 result 42 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Scores, in rank order (out of 210): 200.3 MPEG+ (high anchor) 196.1 dm-std 194.6 dm-xtr 192.3 dm-ins 191.2 cbr256 190.4 abr224 189.2 --r3mix 183.7 cbr192This is a very old test, conducted using an older encoder version, and older versions of the presets This test was not conducted using all the safeguards which are normally employed here (It would unfair to imply harsh criticism, because it was one of the first net audio tests carried out, and probably formed part of the learning process for many others) Useful things to note: a) look how many people ranked everything 5.0 (or 4.0), and that others misranked the (exceptionally) high anchor. (There was no ABXing required for this test, though some people did used ABX) b) r3mix published the results of this test, even though it suggested that his preset command line was inferior.IIRC All presets were changed after this test Cheers, David.