Total Members Voted: 643
If you didn't - even now - continue to use patronising name-calling then perhaps I may give a damn. It's taken days from your initial post for you to actually take our advice. Kudos for doing so, but I for one am still pissed with the effort that had to go into this thread to get a sensible post from you.Sorry for being an angry nerd, but we see this too many times; you're not a special case: just another noob wasting my time.Maybe I shouldn't post so early in the morning...
Using a lossless file and being able to hear a difference means that you were able to pick out the lossless file as being better than the lossy.
I agree with you throughout this thread, but feel I must be pedantic on this one.A successful ABX test does not mean he finds the lossless sounds better than the lossy. It means he finds the lossless sounds distinguishably different than the lossy. Nothing more.
[you're probably on the same page with me here, now that I think about your vs. kornchild's phrasing more carefully, but I figured this is worth elucidating]
I don't think comparing .mp3's to .wav's would work because I can always tell between them simply by listening to the cymbals.
note that I am under 20
Am I doing ABX tests the wrong way? Well this is the first time I've done any, someone should have told me.
I don't think comparing .mp3's to .wav's would work because I can always tell between them simply by listening to the cymbals. cymbals often sound like a jingly mess on mp3's but they sound good on .wav's.
. . . I guess that's because the frequency cutoff, before I decided to use mp3's I also tried AAC files with frequency cutoff's at 18khz, 20khz, etc. The cymbals on those files sounded better, but I decided the higher frequency cutoff wasn't worth the extra memory because the difference wasn't that big. Then I eventually decided to stick to mp3's because the frequency cutoff doesn't really effect the music that much. (cymbals, pffft)
I know there has been numerous debates about frequency stuff in the past, and i don't want to start another one, but also note that I am under 20 which means i should be able to hear higher frequencies than middle aged people. (I've at least done my homework on this one) (yay wiki) (also, you know those annoying ring tones that only young ppl can hear? Well if your old you don't, but yeah.)
I have tried comparing lower bitrate files and higher ones and i can tell the difference. . . I don't think comparing mp3's to .wav files would help much. I guess I'll try it just to make sure though, I will compare a 320 kbps mp3 (just to be safe) and a .wav file and see if I can beat an ABX test.
And of course remember that I have so much memory I can use slightly overkill bitrates if i want. I'm not going to use 320 kbps any more but i might as well use the highest bitrate for which I can tell the difference between lower ones. If quality is subjective like one of you said, I'll use the highest bitrates I deem fit, ABX tests or not.
Seriously, I got almost 8 gigs and the player wasn't even that expensive. Cheaper than those dam ipods, and better sound output. My Library isn't that big either.You guys aren't going to convince me to use a lot lower bitrates, but I appreciate the continued input.. . . and one more time, sorry, I guess you guys were fairly patient considering I was rambling on about something that isn't true. I was quite ignorant. And all right, I get the point, CBR isn't as good as VBR, I knew that. But it isn't terrible. That's all my thoughts.Damn, that has to be one of the longest posts I've ever made on a forum. top 5.
That's all my thoughts.Damn, that has to be one of the longest posts I've ever made on a forum. top 5.
Quote from: JAKE196 on 05 August, 2008, 10:11:17 PMAm I doing ABX tests the wrong way? Well this is the first time I've done any, someone should have told me.We were told that someone was helping you with your ABX tests. How were we to know that they didn't tell you (or maybe they did but you just didn't see) how to properly set them up.
The whole point of ABX tests are to compare lossless with lossy tracks. Otherwise we shouldn't even take ABX tests and just use lossless for everything.
Quote from: JAKE196 on 05 August, 2008, 10:11:17 PMAnd of course remember that I have so much memory I can use slightly overkill bitrates if i want. I'm not going to use 320 kbps any more but i might as well use the highest bitrate for which I can tell the difference between lower ones. If quality is subjective like one of you said, I'll use the highest bitrates I deem fit, ABX tests or not.Again, you don't compare lossy formats directly to lossy formats like that. You compare a lossless file to lossy files. You can use the highest bitrate that you want. We are just trying to show you the light, take the blindfold off your eyes, and let you know that you don't need to keep using these 256kbps+ bitrates that you keep insisting on using.
Rob - I'd agree with you in technicalities.But the main point of ABX testing in the context of HA is to see which encodes are distinguishable from the original. Since, presumably, the thing we're all aiming for is indistinguishibility from the original.Now, I'd agree with you that if someone can tell a difference between 320 CBR and 128 CBR, it's pretty safe to assume that the 320 is closer to the original (so long as they're from the same or similar encoder, at least).But figuring out which encodes can be differentiated from the original is closer to the point, even if not closer to the original question that Jake asked which started this thread.
...you do it to yourself, just you; you and no-one else...
My Library isn't that big either.
For the record, I believe JAKE196. His ability to determine high-bitrate lossy encodings from one another was enough for me.
I think i've just about read enough of this messy cymbals, HF lowpass, i am young stuff on the net over the years. Even if its true I think its nothing to brag about . If normal masking which works on most people doesn't for you its NOT a good sign of ear health.
So many mixed replies!!!
OK, from now on I won't make a single post about something without ABX test support ...
... and I'll try to document exactly what I did, I should have done that in the first place like Tahnru said. I won't post again until I do a lot more tests involving lossy vs. lossless and lossy vs. lossy.