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: Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED (Read 160236 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #151
Listen to the low anchor sample to spot artifacts' positions.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #152
As the low anchor's artifacts often seemed to massively distort entire samples without regards to any particular sound or location, it didn't really help me much. 

With HD-600 headphones and a headphone amp the difference on some of the castanet samples was so faint I often wasn't really sure the difference I was hearing was real or my imagination, but I could reliably ABX them (I think I scored somewhere around 23 out of 30 on average.)

Oh, and the l3enc version caused actual physical discomfort on some samples... MP3 has came a LONG way!

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #153
Wow, do you test each sample 30 times? I'm a lot lazier and don't go further than 8 times. It's just enough to pass the test with a margin of one error.


Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #155
Any update to your Nov 11 results submission count?

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #156
I received some results, but I didn't check if they are valid or not.
I am not going to update the counters as it doesn't make any sense now anyways - the final deadline remains November 22nd because I don't have time after that date to process and prepare the results if I extend once more and also, having a test last several months is boring.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #157
Hello,

Thanks for you work, but I have a problem.
I clicked on Save ABC/HR Session and the Java Application is not responding anymore...
What should I do?

Regards,

Naunaud.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #158
from the first post  :
Quote
Warning: There seem to be problems with ABC/HR when JRE 1.6 is installed. If you are affected by hangs, crashes or any other difficulties, please download and install JRE 1.5 Update 15 from http://java.sun.com/products/archive/j2se/5.0_15/index.html. You do NOT have to uninstall your existing copy of JRE 1.6 since both versions can be installed at the same time. However, if you have JRE 1.5 and JRE 1.6 installed, please make sure you start ABC/HR with JRE 1.5 manually. Since the working directory has to be the location where abchr.jar is stored, the best thing you can do is to open a command prompt window, navigate to the location where you stored abchr.jar and the rest of the files and then call "C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.5.0_15\bin\java.exe -jar abchr.jar". Of course, this is only an example which you have to adapt according to where java.exe is stored on your PC.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #159
Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 5-June 05
Member No.: 22536

Wow, you joined almost 3 years ago, it is your first post! 


Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #161
from the first post  :
Quote
Warning: There seem to be problems with ABC/HR when JRE 1.6 is installed. If you are affected by hangs, crashes or any other difficulties, please download and install JRE 1.5 Update 15 from http://java.sun.com/products/archive/j2se/5.0_15/index.html. You do NOT have to uninstall your existing copy of JRE 1.6 since both versions can be installed at the same time. However, if you have JRE 1.5 and JRE 1.6 installed, please make sure you start ABC/HR with JRE 1.5 manually. Since the working directory has to be the location where abchr.jar is stored, the best thing you can do is to open a command prompt window, navigate to the location where you stored abchr.jar and the rest of the files and then call "C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.5.0_15\bin\java.exe -jar abchr.jar". Of course, this is only an example which you have to adapt according to where java.exe is stored on your PC.



I'll try that  (I should have read carefully the first post...)


Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 5-June 05
Member No.: 22536

Wow, you joined almost 3 years ago, it is your first post! 


Well, you can learn without posting
This is a great forum, I try to not flood with useless comments


Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #163
Hello,
I'm testing what I can. I started yesterday. Since I'm not in toutch with Hydrogenaudio anymore, I just saw that the test had begun.

And you know what ? This stupid ABC/HR, though reinstalled, kept the open/save default directories of the ancient tests. So yesterday, I ABXed samples 5 and 6 from the multiformat test from two years ago !!! 

But tonight I got the right 8 and 9 samples.

I'll try to test about two more samples tonight, but I have to prepare a real-life ABX test between amplifiers and interconnects that takes place tomorrow in France, thanks to Grand X, who owns the listening room and gear, and Ohl, who owns a hardware ABX switch...

Expect my submission in several hours.


Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #165
Results from you would be really awesome Pio!

Still waiting for Alex B's results.  Any maybe Guru.

You'll have some results tomorrow - probably not the full set. I promise :-)


Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #167
Mine were also sent few hours ago.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #168
Can't wait to see the results...
[expectation mode] @guruboolez [/expectation mode]

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #169
I am sorry, but the results will be published in about two days. You can still post results until then. It seems that some people had some problems saving and I would like to give them the chance to submit since they tested already but sent me wrong files.  Pio also said that he might be able to test a few files more today.

I am not updating the listening test site as this short extension isn't worth mentioning.

Edit: First "correction" just arrived. Somebody sent the ECF files by mistake instead of the ERF ones.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #170
Can we expect an "extra" listening test with the same samples involving Nero/AAC, aoTuV 5.5 and MPC/SV8, or is this kind of thing a little bit out of place these days?

 

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #171
Well, this was definitely the last test at 128 kbps, that is for sure.

The next test will focus on AAC encoders at 80 kbps and the winner of that test will be featured in a multiformat listening test at the same bitrate where Vorbis will participate as well. If Musepack developers think that their encoder is competitive at 80 kbps, I can think about including it, but last time I checked, MPC was good only for > 128 kbps.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #172
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought there was some degree of agreement to testing the 96k-ish range next.  It's been stated numerous times before that 128k has long bumped into the boundaries of the practically, statistically viably and publicly testable (and I expect this test to largely confirm that), and that the real competition now lies in the near-transparent bitrates, which have hardly ever been thoroughly publicly put to the test.  Fwiw, I'm more than willing to host the test samples again.

On second thought, maybe we should be giving Sebastian a break, and let him properly finish this test's results, which I'm sure we're all looking forward to.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #173
isn't it "technically" wrong to call "128 kbps test" when the encoders are basically using VBR? Because for sure there will be higher bitrates than 128.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #174
isn't it "technically" wrong to call "128 kbps test" when the encoders are basically using VBR? Because for sure there will be higher bitrates than 128.

In a very theoretical sense the answer may be 'yes' and in fact VBR brings a slight problem for chosing encoder parameters in order to give a fair comparison to the contenders.
In a practical sense these problems are solved by considering average VBR bitrate for a large variety of tracks (not those investigated within the test).
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17