Skip to main content

Topic: Which is likelier transparent? LAME V2/MPC std./lossyWAV extraportable (Read 2775 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • johnb
  • [*]
Which is likelier transparent? LAME V2/MPC std./lossyWAV extraportable
Hi,

I probably won't be able to abx anyway, but from a technical point of view: which of the three codecs (and corresponding settings) would likely produce the least noticeable artefacts?

So far I have used MPC standard, since it gave me the smallest file size.

What's your opinion?

Cheers
johnb

-----

Sorry, just noticed that the Topic was truncated. It should have said lame V2, mpc standard, Lossywav extraportable
  • Last Edit: 29 August, 2011, 01:30:31 PM by johnb

  • Gecko
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Which is likelier transparent? LAME V2/MPC std./lossyWAV extraportable
Reply #1
Quote
extraportable lowest quality output, not fully transparent.


Lame V2 and MPC standard are generally considered transparent. The most recent (2005) listening test I found, comparing both, is this: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=36465 performed by a single listener with good ears: guruboolez on a single genre: classical. In this particular test both produce similar (if not statistically identical) but non-transparent quality.

AFAIK there is no recent test which provides a general answer to your question (many listeners, diverse sample set), in part because conclusive results are not expected.