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: Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC (Read 62116 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #25
sory, but i am new in here ^^ .
I didn't know how a ABX test is.
So i tried it with a foobar2k abx component with a sample at 128 and got 13/15.
is that worth?





Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #30
ABX is supposed to be performed between lossless and lossy.  If neither version is transparent to you then you need to use ABC(/HR) instead of ABX.

If you cannot tell the difference between QT and lossless but can tell the difference between nero and lossless then TOS #8 has been satisfied.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #31
I tried abx to highlight the existing difference from one to other.
Does it mean something?


Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #33
Hola, List.
Try this http://ff123.net/abchr/abchr.html

The easy way to use it is to feed the comparator with original and decoded lossy files codec_A.wav, codec_B.wav and you are ready for blind test ( Original vs Codec_A, Original vs Codec B). It's also good to do blind test on Codec_A vs Codec_B to be sure that you actually hear the difference.


Quote
So i tried it with a foobar2k abx component with a sample at 128 and got 13/15.
is that worth?

While the probability values (in %) is less than 5% your results are valid.

See the table of probability values here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #34
I also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.


ABX tests are needed, it doesn't matter how "easy" you think it is to hear as you could very well be suffering from the placebo affect.  Proper testing is required before anyone makes subjective audio claims, period.  That is in the TOS (specifically TOS #8) that everyone agrees upon when joining the site.  So proper test results are needed from both you and list before any audio quality claims can be taken seriously.  That and the Nero devs would like to know the performance of their encoder and just what samples their encoder is having issues with.  That way they can fine tune their encoder so that Apple's is not "much better" and comparing the two won't be so "easy to hear."


foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 22:37:54

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy nero.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.wv

22:37:54 : Test started.
22:38:41 : 01/01  50.0%
22:39:17 : 02/02  25.0%
22:40:05 : 03/03  12.5%
22:40:57 : 04/04  6.3%
22:41:45 : 05/05  3.1%
22:42:09 : 06/06  1.6%
22:42:46 : 07/07  0.8%
22:43:09 : 08/08  0.4%
22:43:49 : 09/09  0.2%
22:44:14 : 10/10  0.1%
22:44:19 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10 (0.1%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 22:45:50

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy qt.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.wv

22:45:50 : Test started.
22:46:32 : 01/01  50.0%
22:46:58 : 01/02  75.0%
22:47:29 : 02/03  50.0%
22:47:38 : 03/04  31.3%
22:47:51 : 04/05  18.8%
22:48:19 : 05/06  10.9%
22:48:51 : 06/07  6.3%
22:49:38 : 07/08  3.5%
22:50:40 : 07/09  9.0%
22:51:34 : 08/10  5.5%
22:51:48 : 09/11  3.3%
22:52:32 : 10/12  1.9%
22:52:36 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/12 (1.9%)

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #35
I am going to try the classical piece some day but i guess it will be a lot tougher from the little glim that I had at them. Regards. The prodigy track with nero had more high frequencies and the hi hat seemed more open (like not pressing down the pedal as much) and degraded. Quicktime had less high frequencies but more focused hi hat. The hi hat "sustain" seemed to end faster than with Nero. Maybe Nero can archieve about the same quality if a lower low pass is used? Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #36
I tried ogg vorbis which i favour and it was a little more difficult at times to destingish (spelling?) from the lossless. I used the following settings and encoder and the averge bitrate is 130kbps:
BS; LancerMod(SSE2) [Nov 25 2009] (based on aoTuV b5d [20090301]) (...)
-q 3.5 --advanced-encode-option impulse_noisetune=-7 --advanced-encode-option lowpass_frequency=99


foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 23:04:44

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.wv
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.ogg

23:04:44 : Test started.
23:05:05 : 01/01  50.0%
23:05:31 : 02/02  25.0%
23:06:28 : 03/03  12.5%
23:06:54 : 03/04  31.3%
23:07:13 : 04/05  18.8%
23:07:26 : 05/06  10.9%
23:07:50 : 06/07  6.3%
23:08:07 : 07/08  3.5%
23:08:21 : 07/09  9.0%
23:09:07 : 08/10  5.5%
23:09:55 : 09/11  3.3%
23:10:08 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 9/11 (3.3%)

Sorry for some ABX test being different amount of times I abx:ed them. Sometimes I just forget how many I had done. Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #37
I now saw on the wiki site that 16 attempts is "minimum" but my ears will kill me if I try to do the tests again. Sorry guys and gals. Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #38
It'd be interesting to know if you can detect such differences on many/most tracks in your library, or just certain ones?

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #39
It'd be interesting to know if you can detect such differences on many/most tracks in your library, or just certain ones?

Well, I haven't ABXed the classical piece yet but from what the quick listen that I had they seem more difficult than the Prodigy tracks. I will try a quick ABX right away to see. The type of music that I listen to (Punk Rock, Metal, Blues) is usually quite easy to ABX (please don't tell me to ABX my whole collection, hehe). Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #40
I tried the same sample with QT at 192kbps and it was hard to hear the difference from the losless:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1
2011/02/09 19:39:16

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administrador\Escritorio\prodigy.wv
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administrador\Escritorio\prodigy qt 192.m4a

19:39:16 : Test started.
19:39:39 : 01/01  50.0%
19:40:07 : 02/02  25.0%
19:40:31 : 03/03  12.5%
19:40:52 : 04/04  6.3%
19:41:20 : 05/05  3.1%
19:41:54 : 06/06  1.6%
19:42:42 : 07/07  0.8%
19:43:32 : 08/08  0.4%
19:44:54 : 08/09  2.0%
19:45:18 : 09/10  1.1%
19:45:26 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 9/10 (1.1%)

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #41
Here is my ABX of the classical (ludwig piece). When I found out what to listen for it all got a lot easier but I found it out when I was doing the QT comparison which was the last on. I think Quicktimes low pass gave this one away. It was the violin at the end at the forte fizzo where the last percent/sustain of notes had clearly less high frequencies. Maybe I will try to ABX Nero again now when I know what to look for.

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 23:30:40

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig nero.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig.wv

23:30:40 : Test started.
23:31:49 : 00/01  100.0%
23:32:42 : 00/02  100.0%
23:33:51 : 01/03  87.5%
23:34:35 : 01/04  93.8%
23:35:02 : 01/05  96.9%
23:35:19 : Trial reset.
23:35:59 : 00/01  100.0%
23:36:13 : 00/02  100.0%
23:37:58 : 01/03  87.5%
23:38:12 : 02/04  68.8%
23:38:42 : 03/05  50.0%
23:39:02 : 04/06  34.4%
23:39:47 : 05/07  22.7%
23:40:15 : 05/08  36.3%
23:40:39 : 06/09  25.4%
23:41:09 : 07/10  17.2%
23:41:45 : 08/11  11.3%
23:42:18 : 08/12  19.4%
23:42:56 : 09/13  13.3%
23:43:29 : 10/14  9.0%
23:44:04 : 10/15  15.1%
23:44:36 : 11/16  10.5%
23:45:05 : 11/17  16.6%
23:45:56 : 12/18  11.9%
23:46:42 : 12/19  18.0%
23:46:47 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 13/24 (41.9%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 23:47:31

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig qt.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig.wv

23:47:31 : Test started.
23:48:12 : 01/01  50.0%
23:48:38 : 02/02  25.0%
23:49:03 : 02/03  50.0%
23:49:25 : 02/04  68.8%
23:49:51 : 03/05  50.0%
23:50:17 : 04/06  34.4%
23:51:00 : 04/07  50.0%
23:51:30 : 04/08  63.7%
23:52:06 : 05/09  50.0%
23:52:28 : 06/10  37.7%
23:53:11 : 06/11  50.0%
23:53:46 : 07/12  38.7%
23:54:21 : 08/13  29.1%
23:54:43 : 09/14  21.2%
23:55:20 : 10/15  15.1%
23:55:49 : 11/16  10.5%
23:56:26 : 12/17  7.2%
23:56:53 : 13/18  4.8%
23:57:15 : 14/19  3.2%
23:57:32 : 15/20  2.1%
23:57:56 : 16/21  1.3%
23:58:33 : 17/22  0.8%
23:58:37 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 17/22 (0.8%)

I will try it with ogg later or maybe tomorrow. Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #42
I did a second ABX of the classical (ludwig) piece with Nero and this time is wa very easy to ABX. Some elements lost ambience/reverb compared to the lossless:

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/10 00:05:40

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig nero.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 ludwig\ludwig.wv

00:05:40 : Test started.
00:07:00 : 00/01  100.0%
00:08:19 : 00/02  100.0%
00:09:09 : 00/03  100.0%
00:09:59 : 01/04  93.8%
00:10:21 : 02/05  81.3%
00:10:53 : 02/06  89.1%
00:11:07 : 03/07  77.3%
00:11:28 : 03/08  85.5%
00:11:54 : 04/09  74.6%
00:12:07 : 05/10  62.3%
00:12:26 : 05/11  72.6%
00:12:41 : 06/12  61.3%
00:12:57 : 07/13  50.0%
00:13:16 : 08/14  39.5%
00:13:30 : 09/15  30.4%
00:13:41 : 10/16  22.7%
00:14:31 : 11/17  16.6%
00:14:42 : 12/18  11.9%
00:15:00 : 13/19  8.4%
00:15:11 : 14/20  5.8%
00:15:19 : 15/21  3.9%
00:15:44 : 16/22  2.6%
00:15:53 : 17/23  1.7%
00:15:59 : 18/24  1.1%
00:16:07 : 19/25  0.7%
00:16:23 : 20/26  0.5%
00:16:39 : 21/27  0.3%
00:16:51 : 22/28  0.2%
00:17:14 : 23/29  0.1%
00:17:26 : 24/30  0.1%
00:17:34 : 25/31  0.0%
00:17:54 : 26/32  0.0%
00:17:59 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 26/32 (0.0%)

If I am ging to to be honest, I would NOT had heard the difference if I didn't listen really carefully. A normal listening situation probably wouldn't relieve Nero from the lossless. Regards.

Edit: Corrected the worst english.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #43
Am I blind, or where did you and list get the prodigy.wv and ludwig.wv from? Please link to or upload the original .wv files in this forum so we can try it ourselves!

Edit: Regarding prodigy.wv, I am blind. Sorry. But do you have ludwig.wv for me? 

Thanks,

Chris
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #44
Am I blind, or where did you and list get the prodigy.wv and ludwig.wv from? Please link to or upload the original .wv files in this forum so we can try it ourselves!

Thanks,

Chris


I think it is on the first page of the thread where it is linked to on a mediafire.com site. Regards.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #45
NeroAAC is still suffering from the bug I reported a while ago (I just downloaded the latest encoder from their site and ran the test at q=0.5 and 0.55):
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=83246

Unless they messed up the Quick Time encoder, it should encode the sample just fine.

Cymbal rides are used a lot in rock, metal, jazz, blues and whatnot and they get smeared by NeroAAC. You don't need to ridicule the guy for thinking it's inferior.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #46
1) No one is being ridiculed.

2) It is readily apparent that a member who agreed to our TOS made claims about quality on this forum without knowing about double-blind testing methodology.  It doesn't matter if it the claims were correct or not, this is unacceptable.


 

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #48
Ah, thanks. By the way, since list supposedly ABXed prodigy at 192 kbps, you or him should upload the original file on HA directly (so it's preserved here), for example in this thread:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=70598

and preferably in FLAC format since all other lossless files in that thread are in that format. When you do, please link to this thread.

Thanks,

Chris
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.

Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC

Reply #49
My choice is QT (--tvbr 120). Nero has good detailed focused highs, but lows and mids are blurry and depressed. It isn't transparent for me (ABX 8/8 (0.4%)).
QT sounds little bit pushy compared to original, but still transparent.