Ivan> PEAQ results for LAME with sample 16 "SongForGuy" is unusually low. The listening test result for this sample doesn't show anything unusual:
http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/image019.png
Do you have an idea about this big difference?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=357534\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At first, I thought that sample 3 was similarly odd too:
iTunes Nero LAME Vorbis WMA Shine
Sample 03 -0.454201 -0.418986 -1.21393 -0.531274 -0.833721 -1.35914
but then I checked my test report and found out that I too ranked LAME and Shine similarly poorer than the others (which I couldn't differentiate):
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 13 January 2006
Testname: Carbonelli
Tester:
1L = Sample03\Carbonelli_3.wav
2L = Sample03\Carbonelli_1.wav
3R = Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
4L = Sample03\Carbonelli_6.wav
5L = Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
6L = Sample03\Carbonelli_5.wav
---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
3R File: Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
3R Rating: 3.8
3R Comment: Artifact in the very first long note
---------------------------------------
5L File: Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
5L Rating: 3.8
5L Comment: Sounds a little "unstable". Probably the low anchor.
Carbonelli is the only sample where low anchor is not obvious.
---------------------------------------
ABX Results:
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
11 out of 12, pval = 0.0030
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
17 out of 17, pval < 0.001
---- Detailed ABX results ----
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
Playback Range: 14.227 to 15.868
3:12:42 AM f 0/1 pval = 1.0
3:12:45 AM p 1/2 pval = 0.75
3:12:48 AM p 2/3 pval = 0.5
3:12:51 AM p 3/4 pval = 0.312
3:12:54 AM p 4/5 pval = 0.187
3:12:57 AM p 5/6 pval = 0.109
3:12:59 AM p 6/7 pval = 0.062
3:13:02 AM p 7/8 pval = 0.035
3:13:05 AM p 8/9 pval = 0.019
3:13:08 AM p 9/10 pval = 0.01
3:13:11 AM p 10/11 pval = 0.0050
3:13:15 AM p 11/12 pval = 0.0030
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 01.329
3:20:40 AM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
3:20:48 AM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
3:20:51 AM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
3:20:54 AM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
3:21:05 AM p 5/5 pval = 0.031
3:21:32 AM p 6/6 pval = 0.015
3:21:35 AM p 7/7 pval = 0.0070
3:21:37 AM p 8/8 pval = 0.0030
3:21:42 AM p 9/9 pval = 0.0010
3:21:46 AM p 10/10 pval < 0.001
3:21:54 AM p 11/11 pval < 0.001
3:21:57 AM p 12/12 pval < 0.001
3:22:01 AM p 13/13 pval < 0.001
3:22:03 AM p 14/14 pval < 0.001
3:22:06 AM p 15/15 pval < 0.001
3:22:09 AM p 16/16 pval < 0.001
3:22:12 AM p 17/17 pval < 0.001
As a comparison, guruboolez's results were these:
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 décembre 2005
Testname: Carbonelli
Tester: guruboolez
1L = Sample03\Carbonelli_5.wav
2L = Sample03\Carbonelli_1.wav
3L = Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
4L = Sample03\Carbonelli_6.wav
5R = Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
6R = Sample03\Carbonelli_3.wav
---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1L File: Sample03\Carbonelli_5.wav
1L Rating: 4.8
1L Comment: very very small ringing (I'm surprised myself by the ABX score I get)
---------------------------------------
2L File: Sample03\Carbonelli_1.wav
2L Rating: 3.8
2L Comment: little ringing
---------------------------------------
3L File: Sample03\Carbonelli_2.wav
3L Rating: 2.0
3L Comment: tremolo effect; very minor kind of warbling also
---------------------------------------
4L File: Sample03\Carbonelli_6.wav
4L Rating: 4.3
4L Comment: minor distortion (unsure -> need ABXing)
---------------------------------------
5R File: Sample03\Carbonelli_4.wav
5R Rating: 1.3
5R Comment: severe ringing
---------------------------------------
6R File: Sample03\Carbonelli_3.wav
6R Rating: 4.3
6R Comment: same kind of problem than 4L
---------------------------------------
ABX Results:
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_6.wav
8 out of 8, pval = 0.0030
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_5.wav
7 out of 8, pval = 0.035
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_3.wav
7 out of 8, pval = 0.035
---- Detailed ABX results ----
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_6.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 02.695
8:15:57 PM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
8:16:01 PM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
8:16:07 PM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
8:16:09 PM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
8:16:12 PM p 5/5 pval = 0.031
8:16:16 PM p 6/6 pval = 0.015
8:16:21 PM p 7/7 pval = 0.0070
8:16:25 PM p 8/8 pval = 0.0030
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_5.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 02.695
8:18:32 PM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
8:18:36 PM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
8:18:41 PM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
8:18:51 PM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
8:18:55 PM p 5/5 pval = 0.031
8:18:59 PM p 6/6 pval = 0.015
8:19:03 PM p 7/7 pval = 0.0070
8:19:16 PM f 7/8 pval = 0.035
Original vs Sample03\Carbonelli_3.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 02.695
8:17:05 PM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
8:17:09 PM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
8:17:26 PM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
8:17:31 PM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
8:17:34 PM p 5/5 pval = 0.031
8:17:38 PM f 5/6 pval = 0.109
8:17:45 PM p 6/7 pval = 0.062
8:17:49 PM p 7/8 pval = 0.035
Here's a summary:
PEAQ _ Alex B _ guruboolez
iTunes: -0.45 (~4.5) _ 5.0 _ 3.8
Lame: -1.2 (~3. _ 3.8 _ 2.0
Nero: -0.42 (~4.6) _ 5.0 _ 4.3
Shine: -1.36 (~3.6) _ 3.8 _ 1.3
Vorbis: -0.53 (~4.5) _ 5.0 _ 4.8
WMA: -0.83 (~4.2) _ 5.0 _ 4.3
All three testers found LAME and Shine clearly worse than the others with this sample. Advanced PEAQ found WMA Pro slightly worse than the AAC codecs or Vorbis. Guru found that iTunes had a bit more problems than Nero or WMA and ranked Vorbis to be the best.
EDIT
The overall results for this sample:
Artist: Giovanni Stefano Carbonelli
Title: Sonata Settima In La Minore
Genre: Baroque Chamber Music
Sumbitted by: guruboolez
Nero score: 4.90
iTunes, AoTuV and WMA Professional are tied on first place. LAME and Shine are tied on last place.
EDIT 2: added PEAQ resuts in scale 0.0 - 5.0