192 kbit/s listening test at SoundExpert
Reply #52 – 2006-07-06 07:40:32
Why not? Especially if they are comparable in quality. So, what - "coherency" or practical usefulness? And last but not the least: more interesting contenders - more participants. Fine. Then you shoud favor MPC --standard and vorbis -q6. It would lower the bitrate, as -V2 does for LAME (but probably not as much of course)Unfortunately this approach is not ideal as well because actual figures will depend on type of albums chosen for bitrate calculations. Add more classical music albums and you’ll get lower values, more hard/metal – higher values. Such figures will be “just for reference” in any case like SE ones. I know. Nevertheless, I guess that the average bitrate would be more representative. As example, LAME seems to give a lower than average bitrate for classical. But my own bitrate table [16 hours of music, 150 different tracks] gives me 180 kbps for -V2 [--vbr-new]; you got 173 kbps. People listening other kind of music reported ~190...200 kbps with -V2 with peaks at 220 kbps and more. 173 kbps according to your methodology seems to be significantly different from what people reported in the past several times. I'm sure that a set of various disc would give good results for a bitrate table. Not necessary perfect, but at least worth to try EDIT: at last, I found again the message I was looking for:http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=367334 - Musepack restriction was set by recommendations of musepack.net people - non-"integral" quality values are not as well-tested and are hardly ever used. So testing something between -q5 and -q6 is not recommended by the musepack.net maintainers. Moreover, it's not representative (it's likely that people are using the old "presets").[/color]
Wavpack Hybrid: one encoder, one encoding for all scenarios WavPack -c4.5hx6 (44100Hz & 48000Hz) ≈ 390 kbps + correction file WavPack -c4hx6 (96000Hz) ≈ 768 kbps + correction file WavPack -h (SACD & DSD) ≈ 2400 kbps at 2.8224 MHz