Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Topic: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs (Read 32823 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #75 – 2021-07-27 19:54:18

Speaking of EQ, precise measurement with a calibrated input (microphone with known frequency response to capture the response of speakers in an acoustic dampening chamber, or dummy head with known response to capture headphones or earphones), this can and has been used by both professionals and volunteers to create equalization curves for specific models of speakers and headphones. They're likely to work for most devices in the same product line. They're designed to compensate for the biases or weaknesses in the response curve of the device, so they will produce as flat a response as is possible for the device in question.

As far as equalization is concerned, that's pretty much the only method I'd condone for production, and also for testing.

Hand tuning things can be fine, but could also result in noticing things that shouldn't affect casual listening. I recommend looking around for EQ presets for your exact model of device if you lack the equipment to calibrate it yourself. Of course, calibrating it by ear is probably okay to begin with, and may be better than forcing yourself to listen to horribly out of balance audio.

Check out AutoEq, they may have presets for your device:

https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #76 – 2021-09-30 19:32:41

I made an interesting discovery today:
AppleAAC is better at 256k ABR q1 (quality 64) then 320 CVBR /ABR and ABR q1
(Complete guessing

)
I also noticed that using q0 (quality 32) is very similar (the same actually to my ears) to q96 but much faster at inceased bitrate by 3-6%.

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-09-30 20:18:23

Apple AAC 256k ABR -q 1

File A: Electronica (Sample).flac
SHA1: fa044d2f4662f4689707666fe971d64d4882093b
File B: Electronica (Sample).m4a
SHA1: ec6767b7c2283cfc5b5ea9995f7361c688dcbace

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

20:18:23 : Test started.
20:19:11 : 00/01
20:19:20 : 01/02
20:19:46 : 02/03
20:19:52 : 02/04
20:20:15 : 02/05
20:20:33 : 02/06
20:20:50 : 02/07
20:20:57 : 02/08
20:21:09 : 02/09
20:21:35 : 02/10
20:21:35 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 2/10
p-value: 0.9893 (98.93%)

Also disappointment at WavPack -b576s0.5 (I thought it's transparent but is not)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-09-30 19:50:04

WavPack -b576s0.5

File A: Electronica (Sample).flac
SHA1: fa044d2f4662f4689707666fe971d64d4882093b
File B: Electronica (Sample).wv
SHA1: f5b91e438edd5fa2ca11d10faed34d07084d0ed2

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

19:50:04 : Test started.
19:51:02 : 01/01
19:51:22 : 02/02
19:51:31 : 03/03
19:51:38 : 04/04
19:51:46 : 05/05
19:51:53 : 06/06
19:52:01 : 07/07
19:52:13 : 08/08
19:52:22 : 09/09
19:52:29 : 10/10
19:52:29 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

And finally decided to test FDK AAC. When it fails even 512k CBR is not helping.

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-09-30 19:55:38

FDK_AAC 512k CBR

File A: Electronica (Sample).flac
SHA1: fa044d2f4662f4689707666fe971d64d4882093b
File B: Electronica (Sample).m4a
SHA1: 74214a5c2cf8ad0b5c8ad3daa189be7506219926

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

19:55:38 : Test started.
19:55:57 : 01/01
19:56:02 : 02/02
19:56:07 : 03/03
19:56:11 : 04/04
19:56:15 : 05/05
19:56:19 : 06/06
19:56:23 : 07/07
19:56:29 : 08/08
19:56:37 : 09/09
19:56:44 : 10/10
19:56:44 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #77 – 2021-09-30 21:47:20

-a 256 -q 1

Code: [Select]

foo_abx 2.0.6d report
foobar2000 v1.6.7
2021-09-30 22:45:25

File A: sample.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: sample.m4a
SHA1: f99e74380a5ca37604486744e166cc0431761b19

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver [exclusive], 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

22:45:25 : Test started.
22:45:29 : 01/01
22:45:32 : 02/02
22:45:35 : 03/03
22:45:37 : 04/04
22:45:40 : 05/05
22:45:43 : 06/06
22:45:45 : 07/07
22:45:48 : 08/08
22:45:50 : 09/09
22:45:53 : 10/10
22:45:53 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

 -- signature -- 
8387998dc83ab8f6f01fdb9e00561925ee854b80

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #78 – 2021-10-01 00:14:25

I gave up on trying to determine what's transparent to me, which is why I only store lossless and stream lossless now. Except for YouTube, who won't provide the option.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #79 – 2021-10-02 15:47:54

I find that old mp3 above 128k works in practically everything.
You can use 160k cbr as the most archaic setting. Even that will rarely cause
issues and works in any player ever made. Even here -b160 -h --lowpass 17 does a lot of work considering its
so antiquated and the small filesize.

The other thing that works is the hybrid encoding of wavpack. On the PC or home LAn,
playback / streaming is lossless. When the .wv is copied to limited storage, the playback is lossy.
Something like -b256x4c has low overhead. Suppport on PC and Android is good via 3rd party..

AAC, Opus, Ogg won't cut it for the reason; Still not lossless,
Its not universal as mp3, rare samples can still be an issue. Filesize of 256 or 320 is large when considering that the most archaic mp3 settings of -b160 or 192 do a lot of heavy lifting in an overall sense.

For those that only want lossy, MP3 above 128k or -b320 when you don't care for space is great.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #80 – 2021-10-02 16:40:36

Best:

-Use Lossless only if you can
-Use lossy+ lossless or hybrid coder
-If you have physical CD's and won't use lossless; Rip to Mp3

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #81 – 2021-10-02 17:18:54

I fully agree with both of you.
Considering how cheap the space is these days, there is really no reason to use lossy anymore.
Unless you have compatibility or space problems, obviously.
16/44 FLACs are perfect.

I consider 128 kbit/s MP3 to not be good enough.
144 kbit/s is good, but you know the rules, once you find what sounds good enough
you should go one step above to play it on the safe side.
So I consider 160 kbit/s to be the lowest I can go with MP3.

One thing that I would really like to see is a test between LAME 3.97 and 3.100 at V0.
Lots of people are saying that LAME got dumbed-down after 3.97.
I personally find older LAME versions to be better at lower bitrates. I did some test at V6.
None of them were transparent of course, but I found 3.97 to sound more pleasant.
And I like older LAME's lowpass better. New one seems to be more generous.
I still don't understand why newer LAME versions have lowpass disabled on V0.

Maybe some qualified listeners such as IgorC, Kamedo2 and guruboolez can give us their opinion about 3.97 vs 3.100.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #82 – 2021-10-02 21:05:12

@shadowking
You said everything. I also agree.
Single, high quality, lossy archive is possible for someone who is prepared to make compromise and to accept rare issues. Otherwise, only lossless is the way to go.
Mp3 is good choice. I would say that AAC is also very well supported.

@Markuza97
Have you tried lame 3.100 -V0 --vbr-old ?
Bitrate is lower and it sound good. On this sample also. Much better than default V0.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #83 – 2021-10-03 15:06:33

@ synclagz

What wavpack setting resolves it using -x4 or more ?
BTW You can go beyond -s0.5 all the way to -s1

My impression was -b576x4 with the default noise shaping was fine.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #84 – 2021-10-03 21:16:42

Quote from: shadowking on 2021-10-03 15:06:33

@ synclagz

What wavpack setting resolves it using -x4 or more ?
BTW You can go beyond -s0.5 all the way to -s1

My impression was -b576x4 with the default noise shaping was fine.

WavPack -b576x4 (very small noise - not transparent)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-03 22:04:46

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit.wv
SHA1: 5563795325d0988b57d5035a76576911ee19ea5f

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

22:04:46 : Test started.
22:05:07 : 01/01
22:05:16 : 02/02
22:05:24 : 03/03
22:05:30 : 04/04
22:05:38 : 05/05
22:05:52 : 06/06
22:05:58 : 07/07
22:06:04 : 08/08
22:06:10 : 09/09
22:06:16 : 10/10
22:06:16 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

WavPack -b600x4 (very small noise still present)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-03 22:08:24

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-600x4.wv
SHA1: c9c64d4bad53ee7755bcee4d0413aa334cfdac7e

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

22:08:24 : Test started.
22:08:39 : 01/01
22:08:45 : 02/02
22:08:52 : 03/03
22:09:00 : 04/04
22:09:12 : 05/05
22:09:17 : 06/06
22:09:23 : 07/07
22:09:32 : 08/08
22:09:37 : 09/09
22:09:42 : 10/10
22:09:42 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

I don't know really. I would guess by 640k but I'm not sure. I'm slightly tired now. I'll try tomorrow.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #85 – 2021-10-04 17:10:37

@shadowking

I've put more effort into it today.
I must say that this was difficult.

WavPack -b560x4s0.5 (super tiny noise still present)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-04 17:48:25

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-b560x4s0.5.wv
SHA1: 0710d011b1450c870b4f142b9f1052e61aaa59d1

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

17:48:25 : Test started.
17:48:42 : 01/01
17:48:55 : 02/02
17:49:00 : 03/03
17:49:12 : 04/04
17:49:17 : 05/05
17:49:28 : 06/06
17:49:42 : 07/07
17:49:55 : 08/08
17:50:10 : 09/09
17:50:20 : 10/10
17:50:20 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

I thought that going up a noch is going to solve it but I was wrong

WavPack -b576x4s0.5 (super tiny noise - this was hard I must admit)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-04 17:53:37

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-b576x4s0.5.wv
SHA1: 7d3a5399d82e6edca70344dec867479c5a5ca5e1

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

17:53:37 : Test started.
17:54:07 : 01/01
17:54:23 : 02/02
17:54:32 : 03/03
17:54:44 : 04/04
17:54:50 : 05/05
17:55:00 : 06/06
17:55:06 : 07/07
17:55:13 : 08/08
17:55:34 : 09/09
17:55:43 : 10/10
17:55:43 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

And now I've increased bitrate a little bit more...

WavPack -b600x4s0.5 (Super tiny noise - really hard to spot)
I've got 8/10...

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-04 17:58:41

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-b600x4s0.5.wv
SHA1: 85881ad9c5fa8fe43cb07f94cd3f37e87f13e359

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

17:58:41 : Test started.
17:59:39 : 01/01
17:59:45 : 02/02
18:00:14 : 02/03
18:00:20 : 03/04
18:00:31 : 04/05
18:00:39 : 05/06
18:00:51 : 06/07
18:01:01 : 06/08
18:01:21 : 07/09
18:01:36 : 08/10
18:01:36 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/10
p-value: 0.0547 (5.47%)

I would say that it needs a little bit more bitrate so probably 620-630 x4s0.5 would solve it (with s0.5).

or

-b576x4s0.8 pretty much solves it (I think). I couldn't abx it. Maybe I'll put more effort to try again but I think that this is it.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #86 – 2021-10-05 02:07:16

Thanks synclagz.

If you have time, How would something like -hx6 -s0.8 perform ?
Since -x4 is not the strongest wavpack setting. The bitrate can probably be
lowered.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #87 – 2021-10-05 10:01:34

@shadowking
Yes, I also think that stronger setting could solve it at lower bitrate.
I'll try tomorrow something like -b512hx6s0.8 and see how it goes.
I even think that maybe 480k could be used with strong setting but it needs testing.
This sample is definitely one of the hardest around.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #88 – 2021-10-06 17:56:56

@shadowking

WavPack -b480hx6s0.8 (Tiny noise - hard to spot)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-06 18:22:02

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-480hx6s0.8.wv
SHA1: 14ee83127ebd7804f60cc88dbd2f3fae0de36f6a

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

18:22:02 : Test started.
18:22:26 : 01/01
18:22:34 : 02/02
18:22:45 : 03/03
18:23:02 : 04/04
18:23:09 : 05/05
18:23:14 : 06/06
18:23:55 : 07/07
18:24:01 : 08/08
18:24:06 : 09/09
18:24:18 : 10/10
18:24:18 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

WavPack -b512hx6s0.8 (Super tiny noise - very, very hard to spot)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-06 18:26:16

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-512hx6s0.8.wv
SHA1: 6316b78b34c2af4f129d593863e2088443540292

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

18:26:16 : Test started.
18:26:44 : 00/01
18:26:59 : 01/02
18:27:23 : 02/03
18:27:33 : 03/04
18:27:55 : 03/05
18:28:14 : 04/06
18:28:27 : 05/07
18:28:47 : 06/08
18:28:57 : 07/09
18:29:06 : 08/10
18:29:06 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/10
p-value: 0.0547 (5.47%)

My observations regarding this few abx tests:
All of them were very hard (for me) - we are "splitting hairs" here.

I would say that -b530hx6s0.8 is transparent (for me) I couldn't abx it. 512k is on the edge of my ability/eqipment and I think is still not enough.
i also tried -b512hx6s1 and I couldn't abx it (i'm getting 6/10) but I think that I still hear something. Maybe is my imagination.

To be honest this noise is so tiny that there is no way to spot it in normal listening even if you know exactly at which point this noise appear.

So I would say that:
-b530hx6s0.8 is transparent for me.
-b512hx6s1 might be but I'm not sure (but I would say that it is

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #89 – 2021-10-07 09:24:48

Nice. So extreme hard to abx quality can be achieved around 448k or more (3:1 compression).
My theory that around 500 ~ 600k wavpack would converge with lossywav appears true.
Something like -b6hx6s0.75 or -b6.5x6s0.75 would be 530 / 570k. In simpler terms,
around 512k could be standard and 576k as an extreme setting.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #90 – 2021-10-07 09:54:20

Quote from: shadowking on 2021-10-07 09:24:48

Nice. So extreme hard to abx quality can be achieved around 448k or more (3:1 compression).
My theory that around 500 ~ 600k wavpack would converge with lossywav appears true.
Something like -b6hx6s0.75 or -b6.5x6s0.75 would be 530 / 570k. In simpler terms,
around 512k could be standard and 576k as an extreme setting.

Yes. I think that this settings 512/576 are comparable to lossywav extreme setting.
Last week I've tried to abx lossywav/Flac -q 4 -s o (~450k without noise shaping to get fast encoding) and I couldn't do it (I could try again to be sure). It seems that even without noise shaping is quite capable at 450-480k.
But I also noticed that I had issues with lossy flacs at playback. Some songs were skipping and I hear loud clicks so they were unplayable. I don't know is it a bug or something else. But according to my limited testing with lossywav, I would say that Flacs produced this way are not 100% compatible.

One other thing to mention, last night after abx-ing 480-512k I also tried -b576hs0.8 and I think is comparable to -b512hx6s0.8. I was already tired and couldn't abx it (576hs0.8 ) but I would say that for high quality and very fast encoding, this setting could be used.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #91 – 2021-10-11 19:06:27

I also wanted to try Opus at 180k and 250k and FhG AAC at 384k. Non is transparent. But test was very hard.

Opus 180k (Small pre-echo. Hard to spot)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-07 18:01:54

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-180k.opus
SHA1: 6caec634ed844580d8402b71c766d778041f3ea2

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

18:01:54 : Test started.
18:02:10 : 01/01
18:02:19 : 02/02
18:02:28 : 03/03
18:02:34 : 04/04
18:02:49 : 05/05
18:03:00 : 06/06
18:03:18 : 07/07
18:03:33 : 08/08
18:03:48 : 09/09
18:03:56 : 10/10
18:03:56 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

Opus 250k (Super tiny pre-echo. Very hard to spot)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-07 18:33:03

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-250.opus
SHA1: 332fbd568c434f8761016b7dcdc50e1683a29636

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

18:33:03 : Test started.
18:33:27 : 01/01
18:33:48 : 02/02
18:33:58 : 03/03
18:34:23 : 03/04
18:34:36 : 04/05
18:34:52 : 05/06
18:34:58 : 06/07
18:35:27 : 07/08
18:35:34 : 07/09
18:35:42 : 08/10
18:35:42 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/10
p-value: 0.0547 (5.47%)

FhG AAC 384k (Tiny pre-echo. Very hard to spot but somewhat easier than Opus)

foo_abx 2.0.6c report
foobar2000 v1.6.5
2021-10-11 19:38:46

File A: CodecTest 16bit.wav
SHA1: 86786351d337f5065444a841bf07f1b2319869c1
File B: CodecTest 16bit-384fhg.m4a
SHA1: f6d13b21b99cd5eed4bfee2564bac6e61bf822ca

Output:
Default : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

19:38:46 : Test started.
19:39:16 : 01/01
19:39:28 : 02/02
19:40:09 : 03/03
19:40:29 : 04/04
19:40:56 : 05/05
19:41:12 : 06/06
19:41:16 : 07/07
19:41:22 : 08/08
19:41:29 : 09/09
19:41:54 : 10/10
19:41:54 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10
p-value: 0.001 (0.1%)

Difference between FhG 320 and 384 is very very small. 384k is tiny bit better.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #92 – 2021-11-11 00:02:26

Quote from: shadowking on 2021-10-07 09:24:48

Something like -b6hx6s0.75 or -b6.5x6s0.75 would be 530 / 570k. In simpler terms,
around 512k could be standard and 576k as an extreme setting.

Interesting, I just might might raise my -bxxx setting.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #93 – 2024-02-25 01:51:38

@Markuza97 Oh, that sample has knocked me off my feet.

@shadowking We talked a lot about Wavpack, I even wondered why you had -s0.5 in your signature, then I settled on -b4x. And now I have to think again about hybrid flags and recompress all those techno compositions. Geez, helix-mp3.exe -V150 -HF2 -U2 and ogg-lancer.exe -q8 sound waaay better and weigh less than Wavpack hybrid in this case. Also thanks for fixing Lame 3.100 -V0 by adding --vbr-old, it's truly a revelation.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #94 – 2024-02-25 03:02:49

Quote from: Kraeved on 2024-02-25 01:51:38

@Markuza97 Oh, that sample has knocked me off my feet.

@shadowking We talked a lot about Wavpack, I even wondered why you had -s0.5 in your signature, then I settled on -b4x. And now I have to think again about hybrid flags and recompress all those techno compositions. Geez, helix-mp3.exe -V150 -HF2 -U2 and ogg-lancer.exe -q8 sound waaay better and weigh less than Wavpack hybrid in this case. Also thanks for fixing Lame 3.100 -V0 by adding --vbr-old, it's truly a revelation.

I tried -b4x then -x4 to -x6 with my pc speakers. With -x6 or possibly -x5 it would likely go unnoticed.
You could use -x4-6 for electronic music and -x for rest.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #95 – 2024-02-25 03:07:28

But is it a properly released sample or a lab made proof of concept? I am not too worried about 100% artificial,
But do care for CD's that I will rip. I think its rare spectogram and it has low volume and bitrate too. Might be mono or close.
All these atypical switches for 1 sample has me thinking. I don't have a conclusion but am leaning towards a few..

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #96 – 2024-02-26 08:39:25

OK, I had another listen last night this time with MS1 headphones and yes its more obvious there.
For Wavpack lossy what its need for good quality at normal listening level is mostly expected (for critical samples) except noise shaping.

Bitrate needs to be in the 400k zone . -b384hx4s.5 and -b400x5s.5 are good , perhaps there is a small difference in background hiss (without -h) but i think the main issue is greatly reduced. This corresponds to -b4.35 to 4.55 in alternative notation. Also brute force does work to an extent like -hhx5 you can use slightly lower bitrate. Practically speaking, normal mode with -x5 to 6 and -h with -x4 are needed. They aren't too slow except maybe -x6 on encoding.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #97 – 2024-02-26 11:21:10

I would have thought the key thing here is to ABX one codec with another codec. It does not seem remarkable that a listener can 100% spot the compressed version when compared with the uncompressed original!

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #98 – 2024-02-26 12:01:45

Quote from: fooball on 2024-02-26 11:21:10

I would have thought the key thing here is to ABX one codec with another codec. It does not seem remarkable that a listener can 100% spot the compressed version when compared with the uncompressed original!

That can be done too. However, There's distinct differences between errors - mp3 adds smeared clicks and wavpack hiss/noise..
It will be very easy to tell apart. Key is which can sound most neutral or even transparent and at acceptable bitrates.

Re: Great killer sample, easy to ABX on most codecs

Reply #99 – 2024-02-26 17:50:12

@shadowking, have you tried lame3995o (thread, download) by @halb27?
Put mp3packer in the same folder, use a new switch -Q1 alone and witness the miracles.

Notice