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 161705 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #75 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
I think I know what the problem is... What happens if you do this:

cmd
E:
cd \ABC-HR
D:\Program Files\Java\jre1.5.0_15\bin\java.exe -jar abchr.jar

nice, that fixes the first problem (at start up), but the play problem is still there.
The Plan Within Plans

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #76 –
I don't know if this might help but I explain what I did. I deinstalled Java v1.6, rebooted PC and then installed Java v1.5 and rebooted again. The .jar files are associated on my Windows VistaSP1 so I just have to doubleclick on abchr.jar to get ABC/HR running. With Java v1.5 all went OK.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #77 –
Quote from: lexor on
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on

I think I know what the problem is... What happens if you do this:

cmd
E:
cd \ABC-HR
D:\Program Files\Java\jre1.5.0_15\bin\java.exe -jar abchr.jar

nice, that fixes the first problem (at start up), but the play problem is still there.


The second problem might be caused by the wrong soundcard being selected. Can you please open the ABC/HR options and verify that your soundcard is selected and not something else?

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #78 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
The second problem might be caused by the wrong soundcard being selected. Can you please open the ABC/HR options and verify that your soundcard is selected and not something else?

ok then, all fixed  I forgot I actually have 2 (forgot the on-board one)
The Plan Within Plans

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #79 –
Am I the only one to not be able to find the low anchor with the sample 11, or is there a problem with the pack? (i got it from the .be mirror)

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #80 –
I remember that with one sample (it will be sample 11 then)  low anchor didn't have an obvious issue and it took me quite a while to find a problem. Once found it was rather easy to ABX.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #81 –
Quote from: halb27 on
I remember that with one sample (it will be sample 11 then)  low anchor didn't have an obvious issue and it took me quite a while to find a problem. Once found it was rather easy to ABX.

I did notice that the low anchor of sample 11 is not far away from some of the other samples, but the last sample sounds almost bad as the low anchor IMO.

Quote
' date='Oct 30 2008, 21:39' post='596565']
Am I the only one to not be able to find the low anchor with the sample 11, or is there a problem with the pack? (i got it from the .be mirror)


The vocals at 0:08 on the low anchor is a dead give away, IMO the low anchor version of sample 11 is very competitive.
"I never thought I'd see this much candy in one mission!"

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #82 –
Quote from: Alex B on
Particularly in this test we should not too easily let the contenders to pass any of the tests "as transparent" if we want to get any meaningful test results. Otherwise the test would be unnecessary.

The problem I'm having is distinguishing any differences whatsoever (save for the low anchor), even with prolonged listening at higher-than-"casual" volumes. There's always that danger of not being too sure about a particular sample and wishing to avoid rating the reference, so I wind up just choosing an appropriate rating for the low anchor and leaving the rest of the set "blank".

The 64kbps multiformat test was difficult enough for me, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to sit this one out. Would it be helpful, though, to submit results where only the low anchor is rated, or is that counter-productive?

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #84 –
Quote from: /mnt on
... I did notice that the low anchor of sample 11 is not far away from some of the other samples, but the last sample sounds almost bad as the low anchor IMO. ... The vocals at 0:08 on the low anchor is a dead give away, IMO the low anchor version of sample 11 is very competitive.

You can't be sure which is the low anchor then. It is possible, though not very likely, that a contender is worse than the low anchor.

I just tested the sample 11. I could easily spot two contenders. The other four were difficult or transparent to me. (A tip to anyone struggling with this sample: try to ABX the first 1.5 seconds.)


Sebastian,

Have you got lots of results? Maybe you should extend the test a bit (once again). This time we also have the  Java problem. Some testers couldn't start testing before the solution was found and an earlier version was installed.

Personally I am through 10 samples. Naturally I want to test all samples, but I am now leaving for a weekend vacation. I would need only an extra day or two, but you should not end the test too early if there is any chance of getting more results.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #86 –
Quote from: Ron Jones on
[The problem I'm having is distinguishing any differences whatsoever (save for the low anchor), even with prolonged listening at higher-than-"casual" volumes. There's always that danger of not being too sure about a particular sample and wishing to avoid rating the reference, so I wind up just choosing an appropriate rating for the low anchor and leaving the rest of the set "blank

That's why there's an integrated ABX tool in abc/hr. I've used it to verify that i'm hearing what i'm hearing.

I.e.: i tend to switch rapidly between the samples, until i find a suspecting problem. If i'm unsure of what i hear, i launch the abx and select that sample vs original. I then try to pick the difference, and produce a successful ABX.
Then, i go back and move the slider of the one showing that problem.

Other times i just listen to the reference sample several times, before listening to the lossy sample, in the attemt to memorize the sound.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #87 –
I need at least twice as many results as I have now in order to have statistically valid data. The average number of results per sample is 7 and I would like to have 20.

Sample01: 11
Sample02: 7
Sample03: 6
Sample04: 7
Sample05: 7
Sample06: 6
Sample07: 7
Sample08: 6
Sample09: 7
Sample10: 6
Sample11: 6
Sample12: 9
Sample13: 6
Sample14: 7

Edit: Had to throw away some results as they contained ranked references (with a 2.0 score) and in some cases even multiple ranked references with different scores. Wondering if I should disqualify all results from that user.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #89 –
There's one statistic which hasn't been considered yet, in any listening test I know of.

It would be interesting to know if the ability to ABX different encoders depends on the quality of the equipment, and what the nature of that dependency is. There's a tremendous number of people claiming that the quality of their mp3's etc. is not satisfying enough for their pro-audio gear, so one would assume that there's a positive correlation.

But, OTOH, balanced equipment is precisely the basis for the psychoacoustic models, and, I guess, to some degree also the preferred choice for listening tests by the developers. Contrary to cheap phones, for example, which can arbitrarily invalidate masking assumptions. According to this, there might instead be a negative correlation, i.e. it could mean that you can't distinguish anything above, say, 128kbps using a high-end setup.

Even if people merely submitted personal ratings of their equipment from low-end to ultra-high-end, such an analysis should be perfectly possible.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #90 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
I need at least twice as many results as I have now in order to have statistically valid data. The average number of results per sample is 7 and I would like to have 20.

These are disappointing numbers so far. I hope many people wait until just before the deadline expires just like in school or college

Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
Edit: Had to throw away some results as they contained ranked references (with a 2.0 score) and in some cases even multiple ranked references with different scores. Wondering if I should disqualify all results from that user.

Only allowing to move a slider after a successful ABX would be a solution.

Disqualifying is a difficult question. Ideally this should have been decided beforehand. You could look if the other results look meaningful (e.g. low anchor lowest quality). But that would introduce bias and probably wouldn't be too scientific.

Is the feature that the reference slider is locked after ABX anywhere documented? I find it very helpful but didn't really notice it until I read about it in this thread.

http://ff123.net/64test/practice.html doesn't mention it. IIRC this feature wasn't available back then.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #91 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
Edit: Had to throw away some results as they contained ranked references (with a 2.0 score) and in some cases even multiple ranked references with different scores. Wondering if I should disqualify all results from that user.

Maybe (just a guess!) this user did the same thing as Alexxander:

Quote from: Alexxander on
As I had Java crashes when saving results or sessions, I wrote down the (slider) results on paper before saving, just in case I had a crash. I figured that in case of a crash I just could open again the ABC/HR Config of the same sample and save results again.

but didn't notice that

Quote from: Alexxander on
when you reload the ABC/HR Config with the same track the sample orders have changed so my results written on paper didn't correspond anymore.

In this case - yes, it is better to disqualify all results from him/her.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #92 –
Unfortunately, I received only one single result since my last post. If anyone finished the test already and is waiting for the deadline to come to submit results, please don't and send them ASAP.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #93 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
Unfortunately, I received only one single result since my last post. If anyone finished the test already and is waiting for the deadline to come to submit results, please don't and send them ASAP.

And it's not necessary to test all samples, allthough it's preferible. If you only can test a few samples just pick some randomly between Sample01 and Sample14. It's better to test 3 samples and send the results then trying to do all and end up sending none. Send what you have, you can always send more later (before deadline).

Don't hesitate to ask if you don't get the setup right or have doubts working with the ABC/HR for Java program.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #94 –
Sent in my results today. 

Really tough to distinguish.  I'm mostly untrained in spotting artifacts.  The low anchor was generally easy to spot, but beyond that i could only rarely find a problem in any of the other samples.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #95 –
Was the listing test announcement submitted to doom9, Slashdot, Digg, Reddit, Engadget, etc? Maybe that would help with the low number of samples.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #97 –
IMHO, just extend the test. Maybe for weeks. The results submitted so far don't become invalid.

The JRE-issue may be one important reason for the poor feedback. I had to set up Ubuntu on a VM to get it work, but unfortunally i have not enough time to participate in the coming 2 weeks.

Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - CLOSED

Reply #98 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
doom9 yes, all others no. Roberto all sent the announcement to the people that subscribed to his listening test newsletter a while back.

If you extend it for a couple of weeks, i can submit it to the sites.