Are you able to ABX the QT version from the lossless version?
So i tried it with a foobar2k abx component with a sample at 128 and got 13/15.is that worth?
Quote from: punkrockdude on 08 February, 2011, 09:00:19 AMI also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.ABX tests are needed, it doesn't matter how "easy" you think it is to hear as you could very well be suffering from the placebo affect. Proper testing is required before anyone makes subjective audio claims, period. That is in the TOS (specifically TOS #8) that everyone agrees upon when joining the site. So proper test results are needed from both you and list before any audio quality claims can be taken seriously. That and the Nero devs would like to know the performance of their encoder and just what samples their encoder is having issues with. That way they can fine tune their encoder so that Apple's is not "much better" and comparing the two won't be so "easy to hear."
I also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.
It'd be interesting to know if you can detect such differences on many/most tracks in your library, or just certain ones?
Am I blind, or where did you and list get the prodigy.wv and ludwig.wv from? Please link to or upload the original .wv files in this forum so we can try it ourselves!Thanks,Chris