Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: [OFFENSIVE] trolling split (Read 2929 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Quote
Quote
This particular test should be called, "The 128 kbps test for iTunes/WMA, and the low-130 test for AC3 and LAME, and the close-to-160 test for MPC/Vorbious.

Leahy   iTunes   MPC   Vorbis   Lame   WMA   Atrac3

bitrate   128   155   149   133   128   132

Score   4.34   4.41   4.68   4.11   4.37   3.76

I am aware of the rationalization. I am aware of the overall average. But let this be a n"oh?" to those that don't and aren't.

See here how the average bitrates were decided for this test (personally I'm not absolutely sure if it was enough). Obviously those settings in the table close to 128 were used:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=207203

Also the correct average bitrates for the 18 samples tested are (instead of what you said):
Code: [Select]
iTunes MPC   aoTuV  Lame    WMA  Atrac3
128    136     135   134    128    132

First, I already replied to this but it was removed.

Second, if you look at the table, it clearly shows the test.

Third, if a test takes hard samples and encoders boost their bitrate to deal with those, and then get thrown a few simple samples so their bitrate averages get reduced, what you have is, what we call in the legal system, a sham.

Let me give you an example:

hard samples:  140-160 kbps
simple samples: 90-100 kbps

Average:  134 kbps

Now look at the given reasoning for the simple samples:  To make the average bitrates "closer".  Yeah, that's a sham, all right.

And really, only a sample count of 11?  Std. dev. of typically +/- 1?  That's  bad swaying considering it's 40%.

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #1 –
Fourth, and I've said this before, if you have six players and two tie for first, the next place is third, not second (there is no second if two tie for first).

If you have six players players and five tie for first, the last place is just that, sixth place, not second.

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #2 –
Good Lord. It's so painful...

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #3 –
You live, you learn.  Pain is all in the mind anyway.  Control your destiny.

(Why do I waste the effort when this will be deleted?)

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #4 –
Quote
Quote

Third, if a test takes hard samples and encoders boost their bitrate to deal with those, and then get thrown a few simple samples so their bitrate averages get reduced, what you have is, what we call in the legal system, a sham.

Isn't this what vbr is all about....?
sic transit gloria mundi...

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #5 –
XXX, when will you conduct a listening test? You are obviously a bigger expert in this field than Roberto, David Robinson, ff123 and others. 

I really don't understand why you didn't post any of these concerns in the listening test discussion thread. That thread was active long enough before the actual test started, so you had every chance to do so.
Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.

[OFFENSIVE] trolling split

Reply #6 –
Quote
Quote
Quote

Third, if a test takes hard samples and encoders boost their bitrate to deal with those, and then get thrown a few simple samples so their bitrate averages get reduced, what you have is, what we call in the legal system, a sham.

Isn't this what vbr is all about....?

Roberto,

With so many people misinterpreting the validity of the bitrates perhaps you could add a statement in the results near where the bitrate calculation is shown, and clarify the issue. (i.e. the bitrates seemed raised for VBR encoders as they are VBR encoders and will adjust bitrates for difficult portions of music, and the samples used are difficult portions of music, the bitrate for the whole song will be close to 128kbps).

My concern here is that too many people will use this as an excuse to disregard the test. Adding some clarifying comments will nip the problem at the bud (and reduce a lot of noise on these forums.)

And thank you for a great job on conducting these tests. I'm really looking forward to the 48kbps test.

Rajas