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: 3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact? (Read 12192 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #25
Quote
,Mar 23 2006, 05:45 PM]@ William and skelly : So... tell me... if i just fake an ABX test (listening to two completely different samples) and post it, I will be believed more than if i *say* i did an ABX and how i did it?

If an ABX test is real, then there will be other people who can also ABX the same thing.

Quote
We know that people come here sometimes claiming things because they know no better.
But comming from a 3 and a half years member, and user of HA recommended encoders and settings... it's rude to act this way.

Quote
Sorry to sound harsh...

I believe I have already said sorry in the beginning of my reply. And in fact I don't think saying that "a statement needs a support" is that rude.

His question about "technical changes between LAME versions" is based on the statement that "he hears something different between 2 versions of LAME and the original", so logically he needs to prove that his statement is valid first in order to make the question valid as well.

If this logic is difficult to understand, then I am sorry that I said something that is difficult to understand and sound rude.

[JAZ], I know we all want to help others as a community, and poorimpulsectrl already agrees to do an ABX test and provide results, so I don't think we need to argue further.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #26
Quote
Yes, you're right, I overreacted and would like to apologize to poorimpulsectrl for being a hard-ass.


Thank you.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #27
wtf is viscerality?

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #28
Quote
wtf is viscerality?

Read the post much?
Quote
Viceral refers to your gut or stomach, or metaphorically to your gut feelings.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #29
I'm starting to wonder who's trolling what in this thread.
Stop the I'm-not-wrong-so-don't-talk-back act; it's very unbecoming.

Anyway, poorimpulsectrl, I think it's better for you to upload a sample where you previously easily discerned the differences between the two encodings, just like what [JAZ] said.
That way, anyone could try and see if they could also find what you've found, and prevents this thread spiralling out of control.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #30
I think enough members have already made the stance clear that ABX results and/or samples are required to continue this discussion, in a sensible and constructive fashion, any further.  Can you all just wait for poorimpulsectrl to post samles and/or ABX results before continuing.

Jumping on high horses, bandwagons, or each other is just dragging this thread down even further.

Thanks.
I'm on a horse.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #31
Technical answer: there is no specific justification for a different bass handling between 3.90.3 and 3.97. However, a lot of things changed between both versions.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #32
Thank you Gabriel. Your input is reassuring and really helps provide some conclusive information I was looking for.

I read through many of your posts on 3.97b2, is there something along the lines of a changelog that would indicate the things changed between versions that improves or has an impact on sound?

From my perspective, I need to:

1. See if I can reliably tell a difference between an encoded MP3 and the original WAV/FLAC. This will verify or discredit my belief that 3.97b2 -V 0 is closer to the original by being harder to distinguish.

2. See if I can reliably tell a difference between 3.97b2 -V0 and 3.90.3 --ape, in terms of kick drum and bass line handling.

Here are the results of one quick test I did for issue #2 yesterday. I know more trials are needed as the 12.5% chance in this first test is too high, but I was able to tell a difference between --ape and -V 0 on each of the trials.

I'm guessing standards here require enough trials such that the probability of chance is less than 5%. I have ripped and encoded 10-12 songs of different types for this purpose and I hope to get them done this weekend.

--
foo_abx v1.2 report
foobar2000 v0.8.3
2006/03/23 18:37:11

File A: file://D:\Method Man - Bring The Pain.mp3
File B: file://D:\Method Man - Bring The Pain (V0).mp3

18:37:21 : Test started.
18:38:16 : 01/01  50.0%
18:39:59 : 02/02  25.0%
18:41:52 : 03/03  12.5%
18:44:18 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 3/3 (12.5%)
---

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #33
Quote
...
I'm guessing standards here require enough trials such that the probability of chance is less than 5%. I have ripped and encoded 10-12 songs of different types for this purpose and I hope to get them done this weekend.
...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=374722"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

An abx session should contain at least 8 trials to be taken seriously.
You should decide on the number of trials before your session (8, 10, more?).
Then you should abx and see what comes out.
Guessing probility is an output of the session. The number of trials is the a priori input.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #34
Quote
I read through many of your posts on 3.97b2, is there something along the lines of a changelog that would indicate the things changed between versions that improves or has an impact on sound?

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*che...ml/history.html

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #35
So much fuss and now this anti-climactic 3/3 abx ..

3/3 tommorow, 3/3 the next day. You need nothing less than 9/9 for such high bitrates.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #36
Quote
Here are the results of one quick test I did for issue #2 yesterday. I know more trials are needed as the 12.5% chance in this first test is too high, but I was able to tell a difference between --ape and -V 0 on each of the trials.

I'm guessing standards here require enough trials such that the probability of chance is less than 5%. I have ripped and encoded 10-12 songs of different types for this purpose and I hope to get them done this weekend.
*cough*

[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']@ poorimpulsectrl

[/span]
With regard to point 2:  Won't it be difficult to judge your choice solely on this fact, and not considering that you also believe that 3.97b2 sounds more crisp than 3.90.3?  Surely your choice will be influenced by aspects of the sample other than the kick and bass?  An ABX test that simply proves that there is a difference between these two encoder versions is of little value...

I can't help feeling that you are "damned if you do, damned if you don't"... Perhaps you could spend your weekend more productively (i.e.: loved ones and beer). 
I'm on a horse.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #37
Quote
3/3 tommorow, 3/3 the next day. You need nothing less than 9/9 for such high bitrates.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=374742"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


No, it doesn't work this way. The total number must be decided before starting. Now that 3 trials are done, it is too late to go on and decide to stop at 9. This should have been done before starting.

Now, we must start from zero again and decide the number of trials for the next test.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #38
Quote
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']@ poorimpulsectrl

[/span]
With regard to point 2:  Won't it be difficult to judge your choice solely on this fact, and not considering that you also believe that 3.97b2 sounds more crisp than 3.90.3?  Surely your choice will be influenced by aspects of the sample other than the kick and bass?  An ABX test that simply proves that there is a difference between these two encoder versions is of little value...

I can't help feeling that you are "damned if you do, damned if you don't"... Perhaps you could spend your weekend more productively (i.e.: loved ones and beer). 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=374749"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I think you're right. On one hand, not being able to reliably identify differences would dismiss the hesitations I've had, which was the purpose of my question. It would be nice to just take at face value all the hard work Gabriel and the rest of the HA community have done on 3.97b2 and use it with no reservation. On the other hand, it would validate those that have suggested my question has no substance to it, regardless of any supporting evidence or reasons I provide. I think I will probably still go ahead with tests using more trials because all I ever wanted was to have the matter resolved and to be able to use an encoder / standard with no hesitation. Truth matters more than pride.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #39
Quote
Quote
wtf is viscerality?

Read the post much?
Quote
Viceral refers to your gut or stomach, or metaphorically to your gut feelings.

[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=374575"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I know what visceral means, even viscerally.  I was asking what viscerality means.

3.97b2 vs. 3.90.3: Kick drum impact?

Reply #40
Quote
I think I will probably still go ahead with tests using more trials because all I ever wanted was to have the matter resolved and to be able to use an encoder / standard with no hesitation. Truth matters more than pride.
That is admirable.

Hopefully, if you can also post the names of the samples, or even better links, your efforts can be of some benefit.  If your results confirm your suspicions then I suspect some others will be very keen to test the samples also, if only to deride you further .  I'm sure Gabriel is interested in any efforts to progress the development of LAME.
I'm on a horse.