HydrogenAudio

Hydrogenaudio Forum => Validated News => Topic started by: rjamorim on 2004-06-30 20:31:51

Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-06-30 20:31:51
Hello.
I'd like to announce the launch of my 32kbps dial-up bitrate listening test

The formats featured are Nero Digital Audio (HE-AAC+PS), Ogg Vorbis, WMA9 Std., MP3pro, Real Audio and QDesign Music Codec.
Lame MP3 is being used as low anchor, and a lowpass at 7kHz is being used as high anchor.

For further information on how to participate, visit the test announcement page:
http://www.rjamorim.com/test/32kbps/presentation.html (http://www.rjamorim.com/test/32kbps/presentation.html)

The test is scheduled to end at July 11th.

Thank-you very much.
Best regards;
Roberto Amorim.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: loophole on 2004-06-30 20:44:34
the faad version for OS X on rarewares appears to decode the HE-AAC samples to mono files. Well I only tested the new york one but it was the case there.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Svante on 2004-06-30 20:51:37
Quote
the faad version for OS X on rarewares appears to decode the HE-AAC samples to mono files. Well I only tested the new york one but it was the case there.

Isn't mono the best alternative for such low bitrates?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: loophole on 2004-06-30 20:57:18
Maybe, but the test was HE-AAC+PS, and PS is useless on a mono file by definition, so I doubt the samples were mono.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Garf on 2004-06-30 21:01:43
Please make sure the files are decoded with recent FAAD2 on all platforms as there have been updates/bugfixes to HE-AAC decoding.

No recent version of FAAD2 should give mono output on *any* file BTW.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-06-30 21:08:09
Hrm... I guess RareWares needs an updated compile of Faad.

Can any Mac user contribute one?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-01 01:36:14
The torrents seem to be flowing well  Are you going to bother sending the word out to the unwashed masses at Slashdot et al?  50gbs of bandwith leeched for ~0 participants seemed futile last time round
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-01 01:40:35
Quote
Are you going to bother sending the word out to the unwashed masses at Slashdot et al?  50gbs of bandwith leeched for ~0 participants seemed futile last time round

Might be worth it. But I don't think they would be interested in a 32kbps test. And, of course, we would se hundreds of posts there claiming such low bitrates are useless, yadda yadda.

Atill, it could bring some participants. I would be grateful if someone could post the news there.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: HotShot~ on 2004-07-01 02:36:01
(off topic ?)
As a newcomer to listening tests (my first ! ), I fear my comments will miss some technical vocabulary - what about a library of audio artifacts with 'technical' terms associated ? 
Anyway such a test seems interesting and promising. Thx !
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: analogy on 2004-07-01 04:11:31
For that matter, is full 44 khz stereo necessary at 32 kbps? If I were streaming 32 kbps, in the interest of quality I would probably downsample to 22khz mono, or even 11 khz mono.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-01 04:27:46
Quote
For that matter, is full 44 khz stereo necessary at 32 kbps? If I were streaming 32 kbps, in the interest of quality I would probably downsample to 22khz mono, or even 11 khz mono.

Only Nero AAC uses full 44.1kHz

All other codecs had the samples downsampled for encoding, and later upsampled for comparision on ABC/HR

The reason of upsampling is working around crappy sound card resamplers, that would bias the test.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: mithrandir on 2004-07-01 05:30:25
I did 4 samples tonight. They are rather easy to do because you don't have to strain to differentiate between the sample and the reference. The results should be very interesting.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: DreamTactix291 on 2004-07-01 08:49:10
Downloaded everything and have it all unzipped an ready to go, but I'm holding off on it right now because I'm sleepy  I'll be pretty worried though if I can't tell 32kbps files from the source lol.  Seriously I am looking forward to the testing.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-01 09:58:27
I shouldn't be surprised, but harashin again finished the entire sample set first. This time in less than 12 hours after the test start.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Sebastian Mares on 2004-07-01 10:03:37
He sure needs real life then.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: westgroveg on 2004-07-01 10:10:27
I haven't been keeping up with this test but can someone tell me why HE-AAC with PS is being used, MP3 Pro but only WMA standard is being used not Pro? doesn't seem fair to me
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: S_O on 2004-07-01 10:36:47
Quote
but only WMA standard is being used not Pro? doesn't seem fair to me
Because the Pro-codec doesn´t work with low bitrates, AFAIK only >= 128 kbps.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Roynux on 2004-07-01 11:00:14
For the Unix enthusiasts, create theses scripts in the bin directory of the test (!! case sensitive !!):

Samplexx.sh
Code: [Select]
flac -d -o $1.wav $1.flac

oggdec $1_2.ogg
mv $1_2.wav $1_2a.wav

faad -o $1_5.wav $1_5.mp4
madplay --output=wave:$1_1a.wav $1_1.mp3

flac -d -o $1_3.wav $1_3.flac
flac -d -o $1_6.wav $1_6.flac
flac -d -o $1_7.wav $1_7.flac
flac -d -o $1_8.wav $1_8.flac

sox $1.wav $1_4.wav filter 0-7000

ssrc --rate 44100 --twopass $1_1a.wav $1_1.wav
ssrc --rate 44100 --twopass $1_2a.wav $1_2.wav

# Cleanup
rm $1.flac
rm $1_1.mp3
rm $1_2.ogg
rm $1_3.flac
rm $1_5.mp4
rm $1_6.flac
rm $1_7.flac
rm $1_8.flac
rm $1_1a.wav
rm $1_2a.wav


Sample.sh
Code: [Select]
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample01/Bartok_strings2
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample02/chanchan
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample03/Debussy
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample04/female_speech
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample05/getiton
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample06/Hongroise
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample07/kraftwerk
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample08/Leahy
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample09/male_speech
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample10/Mama
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample11/NewYorkCity
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample13/rosemary
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample12/OrdinaryWorld
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample14/SinceAlways
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample15/TomsDiner
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample16/trust
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample17/Twelve
sh Samplexx.sh ../Sample18/Waiting


And run with
Code: [Select]
sh Sample.sh
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Ivan Dimkovic on 2004-07-01 11:42:23
Please make sure that for Unix tests  you use latest FAAD2 (www.audiocoding.com) - otherwise some strange things could happen
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Roynux on 2004-07-01 12:07:45
From my gentoo, the ebuild is "media-libs/faad2".

Code: [Select]
$ faad

*********** Ahead Software MPEG-4 AAC Decoder V2.0      ******************

Build: Jun 15 2004
Copyright 2002-2004: Ahead Software AG
http://www.audiocoding.com
Floating point version

This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.

**************************************************************************
...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: menno on 2004-07-01 12:13:13
Quote
From my gentoo, the ebuild is "media-libs/faad2".

Code: [Select]
$ faad

*********** Ahead Software MPEG-4 AAC Decoder V2.0      ******************

Build: Jun 15 2004

....

I prefer if a version build from yesterdays checkin would be used. But this should not give any big problems.

Menno
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: fileman on 2004-07-01 18:42:06
To all extra-lazy windows users who downloaded the "all samples" package and don't want to execute those sampleXX.bat files one by one:

I made a batch file for converting all samples at once, just download it to your test/bin directory and execute it (of course all sampleXX.zip files must have been extracted to test/SampleXX before).

download link (http://fileman.dyndns.org/serve/allsamples.bat)

Regards, fileman.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: ScorLibran on 2004-07-01 18:58:44
Finished all 18 samples.

Results submitted.

G'night everybody.

Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: vinnie97 on 2004-07-02 00:27:45
likewise and good day/evening.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-02 03:14:36
Quote
For the Unix enthusiasts, create theses scripts in the bin directory of the test (!! case sensitive !!):

I added your scripts to abc-hr_bin.zip. Hope you don't mind.

Thank-you very much.

Regards;

Roberto.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Roynux on 2004-07-02 09:36:56
Not at all.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-03 01:03:47
Hello.

I would like you to know that, due to an "emergency" (I must go to a $^%!@ cousin's wedding next weekend. My parents and my brothers won't be able to go, so I must go to represent our side of the family), the results won't be published with the usual speed I'm so proud of.

With a little luck, I'll be able to release them on monday afternoon. But don't hold your breath. Anyway, I'll find a way.

Sorry for the incovenience.

Regards;

Roberto.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: fileman on 2004-07-03 02:21:15
Don't worry about that - everybody knows that you're doing a great job with all these tests! Enjoy the wedding, eat some nice food
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-03 02:24:21
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/0...tid=141&tid=188 (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/02/1812235&mode=thread&tid=141&tid=188)

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE


@fileman: thanks
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Bongoboy on 2004-07-03 04:24:06
I'll take the blame for that. I am CaptainCheese! You asked, no-one objected...

I winder if anyone from /. will actually help out...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: ~*McoreD*~ on 2004-07-03 06:09:25
Quote
Because the Pro-codec doesn´t work with low bitrates, AFAIK only >= 128 kbps.

Hi,

Not in VBR Quality mode. 10%, 25% and 50% quality are low bit rate profiles for WMA 9 Professional and the average bit rate can be reduced to as low as 45 Kbps.

But we still cannot use WMA9 Pro because it is Quality VBR, the bitrate is highly fluctuating and doesn't stay at 32 Kbps.

Cheers,
McoreD
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-03 13:51:59
Quote
I'll take the blame for that. I am CaptainCheese! You asked, no-one objected...

Yes, that's OK. There are probably a handful of /. users that actually participate.

All is fine, as long as I ignore most of the comments...

Thanks for announcing it there.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: deviantintegral on 2004-07-03 16:07:48
I'm trying to run the test on OSX. When running Sample.sh, I get this segfault

Samplexx.sh: line 16: 15841 Segmentation fault      ssrc --rate 44100 --twopass $1_1a.wav $1_1.wav
Shibatch sampling rate converter version 1.29

Samplexx.sh: line 17: 15844 Segmentation fault      ssrc --rate 44100 --twopass $1_2a.wav $1_2.wav

I compiled ssrc from source, using no special options. Any help would be appreciated!

--Andrew
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: merbanan on 2004-07-03 16:27:31
Hi, I'm wondering what Real Audio Codec is used in the test? Because they are using different technology. CELP/Subband/Transform

If the codec from Real is CELP based it should win the speaking samples.

Anyway the codecs are in theise groups, maybe some results can be connected to them later:

CELP:
Real  (if it is Sipro/Cooker)

Subband:
Lame
Mp3Pro

Transform:
AAC (DCT)
Vorbis (DCT)
QDesign (FFT)
WMA9 (DCT)
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Niknak on 2004-07-03 17:05:54
Tip to x86 unix users. Its much easier to use wine than download and compile a load of software. Just type:

wineconsole Sample01.bat

and so on for each sample. It uses the windows EXEs included with abchr and works pretty well.

Don't do what I did and spend loads of time getting the programs to work with the shell scripts only to discover my faad was not recent enough after taking the test!
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: AstralStorm on 2004-07-04 23:14:46
MP3 is a transform format too.

Anyway, the speech samples produce good results with one codec, and very bad with another one...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: ErikS on 2004-07-08 18:01:57
Any news on faad for macosx? The one on rarewares is dated 2003 it says, so I guess that's too old for this test...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-08 18:43:43
Quote
I guess that's too old for this test...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=224166"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Right. Noone contributed new FAAD though :/
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-11 08:16:47
So it's officially over now ? I can't wait for the results 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Tang on 2004-07-11 08:45:20
Someone can give the GMT cloture hour?
i've made the test for on sample (debussy 03) but i've sent my result one hour ago and i don't know if it wan't too late...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: SirGrey on 2004-07-11 10:53:49
Quote
Subband:
Lame
Mp3Pro

Hmm ?
I may be wrong, but mpeg layer 3 is a tranform codec.
As for subband codec examples: mpeg layer 2 and mpc...

EDIT: Half of test results I sent were w/o a name, half with it. Sorry for that, Roberto, if it will raise any problems...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-12 10:07:05
So ? No news ?
At least that means Roberto is hard working on it
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Sebastian Mares on 2004-07-12 10:31:57
Quote
With a little luck, I'll be able to release them on monday afternoon. But don't hold your breath. Anyway, I'll find a way.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=222687"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-12 15:40:57
Wish me luck. It'll still take some time, but hopefully I'll get access to a laptop  and dial-up  later today at my aunt's home.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-12 15:43:21
Quote
Someone can give the GMT cloture hour?
i've made the test for on sample (debussy 03) but i've sent my result one hour ago and i don't know if it wan't too late...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=224840"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's OK. I didn't even grab all results from my Yahoo mail (there are about 40 result e-mails there that need to be fetched, decrypted, renamed, sorted into folders...) so, by all means, results are still being accepted.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-12 16:16:36
Good luck then 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Cygnus X1 on 2004-07-12 16:24:06
Quote
Wish me luck. It'll still take some time, but hopefully I'll get access to a laptop  and dial-up  later today at my aunt's home.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225254"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Welcome to my daily internet experience 

I'm looking forward to the results of this latest test. Good luck getting things together!
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-12 20:34:17
Although it might be a bit late with the test already past its end, could anyone explain what JABCHR is completely failing to do anything on my computer?

The biggest of its problems is that no sound plays, kind of unhelpful for an audio app  All of the play buttons just do nothing.  I don't believe it attempts any playback, from what I can tell the position slider doesn't move at all.  I'm not entirely sure as it doesn't display quite correctly, everything has a new found desire to hide from me  The app loads completely blank, but resizing the window to completely nothing then expanding again makes everything but the slider appear.  As other windows obscure it anything that was hidden becomes blank after it is exposed again.

Everything used to work fine, but I have reformatted and changed some hardware - I am now using the onboard AC97 on my Via motherboard, using their latest Vinyl Stylus drivers.  Everything else can play sound quite happily, it's just JABCHR that fails.  I also downgraded my graphics card a bit, but it is using the drivers Windows assigned it quite happily for every other task.

Eh?!
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: AstralStorm on 2004-07-12 20:40:41
Quote
The biggest of its problems is that no sound plays, kind of unhelpful for an audio app   All of the play buttons just do nothing.  I don't believe it attempts any playback, from what I can tell the position slider doesn't move at all.  I'm not entirely sure as it doesn't display quite correctly, everything has a new found desire to hide from me   The app loads completely blank, but resizing the window to completely nothing then expanding again makes everything but the slider appear.  As other windows obscure it anything that was hidden becomes blank after it is exposed again. <snip>
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225345"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well, which version of Java? Below 1.4.2 there will be problems,
as Java Sound still is in development.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-12 21:01:29
Quote
Well, which version of Java? Below 1.4.2 there will be problems,
as Java Sound still is in development.

It sais v1.4.2_03 - the same version I was running before.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: vinnie97 on 2004-07-13 08:07:26
Quote
Quote
Well, which version of Java? Below 1.4.2 there will be problems,
as Java Sound still is in development.

It sais v1.4.2_03 - the same version I was running before.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225352"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I updated to 1.4.2_05 (was using 1.3.X prior to this test...sounds would play but switching between sources would sometimes result in the application hanging) and experienced no probs.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Bogalvator on 2004-07-13 09:26:41
I used 1.5.0 beta 2 and it seemed to work OK.  I've never seen anyone else mention they were using this version though - is it not considered safe to use?  Should I revert to 1.4.2-05?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-13 22:57:20
I've upgraded to 1.4.2_05 and have the same problems, although I have managed to narrow it down somewhat.

If I open an existing session, everything breaks (no sound, trouble rendering the screen) - but if I start the test again, it appears to work normally.

Is there some reason for this, such as an existing session containing info about my sound & graphics drivers perhaps?  I've changed both the sound and gfx card in this computer, so if it was trying to draw and play things the same way it would run into difficulty.  This is just a stab in the dark though
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-14 01:41:10
Quote
Wish me luck. It'll still take some time, but hopefully I'll get access to a laptop  and dial-up  later today at my aunt's home.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225254"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Joy oh joy

My aunt's laptop (I'm using it now) belongs to her employer and she doesn't have an administrator account. Sure enough, it doesn't come with Java, and I can't install it without admin rights, so I can't decrypt results (not to talk about installing Python for results parsing) 

Please don't hate me, I will really find some way 

Her desktop, which comes with Win98 (no user rights issues) is on maintenance right now, but I suspect the technician is fooling her ("We need to reinstall the internet, lady", I swear that's what they told her), so she'll bring it back tomorrow and I'll try to fix it myself. I bet a format-reinstall will do it.

Best regards;

Roberto.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-14 02:10:02
Quote
If I open an existing session, everything breaks (no sound, trouble rendering the screen) - but if I start the test again, it appears to work normally.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225691"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I get that same screen rendering error. Often participants send me saved sessions (*.abc) instead of results (*.erf) and I have to convert them manually. Not once the sliders get rendered properly.

And I always forget to report this to Schnofler :B
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: guruboolez on 2004-07-14 02:12:00
Are there more results as usual (according to a first impression)? More testers for a less difficult test, or not?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: ff123 on 2004-07-14 02:17:10
Quote
Joy oh joy

My aunt's laptop (I'm using it now) belongs to her employer and she doesn't have an administrator account. Sure enough, it doesn't come with Java, and I can't install it without admin rights, so I can't decrypt results (not to talk about installing Python for results parsing)  

Please don't hate me, I will really find some way  

Her desktop, which comes with Win98 (no user rights issues) is on maintenance right now, but I suspect the technician is fooling her ("We need to reinstall the internet, lady", I swear that's what they told her), so she'll bring it back tomorrow and I'll try to fix it myself. I bet a format-reinstall will do it.

Best regards;

Roberto.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=225740")


I think you can set up Win98 to not ask for userids/passwords, if that is the issue.

[a href="http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=152104]http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=152104[/url]

When I used Win98, there was no problem installing programs as a idless/passwordless user.

ff123

d'oh:  I see now that you're talking about two different computers.  Never mind
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-14 02:22:33
Quote
Are there more results as usual (according to a first impression)? More testers for a less difficult test, or not?[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=225752")


Yes. Shitloads of results. Last thursday I had about 40 results per sample, and countless more arrived this weekend.

(Also, a handful of ranked references, but... oh well )

Quote
I think you can set up Win98 to not ask for userids/passwords, if that is the issue.

[a href="http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=152104]http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=152104[/url]

When I used Win98, there was no problem installing programs as a idless/passwordless user.

ff123[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225754"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The desktop, which is supposedly broken, is using Win98. The laptop I'm using right now is on Win2000. I could probably do some evil hacking to get admin access, but then my aunt could get problems if the technician at her work finds out.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: guruboolez on 2004-07-14 02:25:15
Quote
40 results per sample, and countless more arrived this weekend.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225757"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


  Good news!
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: glistener on 2004-07-14 02:59:17
Quote
The desktop, which is supposedly broken, is using Win98. The laptop I'm using right now is on Win2000. I could probably do some evil hacking to get admin access, but then my aunt could get problems if the technician at her work finds out.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225757"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maybe a LiveCD, e.g. Knoppix is an option?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: bleh on 2004-07-14 03:40:15
Wow, this could turn out to be a really good test with that many results.  Sorry about the computer situation, though
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: vinnie97 on 2004-07-14 07:19:58
Quote
(Also, a handful of ranked references, but... oh well biggrin.gif)


Please tell me I'm not one of them. My hearing condition is well and truly a lost cause if that is the case.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-14 08:55:17
Maybe you could ask Frank Klemm to use his PC 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Tang on 2004-07-14 14:00:11
Quote
Are there more results as usual (according to a first impression)? More testers for a less difficult test, or not?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225752"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think so...as even myself has done the test (for one sample)...
 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Tang on 2004-07-14 14:02:16
Quote
Maybe you could ask Frank Klemm to use his PC 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225814"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I can come with my laptop if Roberto pay the travel to Brasil...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 04:25:38
Quote
Maybe a LiveCD, e.g. Knoppix is an option?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225762"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I'm on dial-up here. I would be back home before the live CD finished downloading.

Besides, no CD-RW drive here.

Quote
Please tell me I'm not one of them. My hearing condition is well and truly a lost cause if that is the case.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225798"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't think so. I will probably remove the ranked references from the results I'll upload, to make sure mean people won't point at others and laugh


Now, I am finally using the Win98 PC. It´s a slightly crappy Pentium 700 with small screen, but will probably do. I'll download all stuff I need overnight (Java, Python, SFTP and SSH client...), and I plan to finish putting results together tomorrow. I hope my 9-year-old cousin won't force me to go to the movies with her to watch Disney's latest 

Talk to you soon.

Best regards;

Roberto.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: glistener on 2004-07-15 04:50:29
Quote
I'm on dial-up here. I would be back home before the live CD finished downloading.

Besides, no CD-RW drive here.

You leave your home without a Knoppix CD in your bag?!? You're definitely not a nerd.

Quote
I don't think so. I will probably remove the ranked references from the results I'll upload, to make sure mean people won't point at others and laugh

Just throw them away? Aren't the ranked references somehow significant too? I wonder, if somebody ranked a reference doesn't that mean that for him that encoder performs very well? (Well, as long as he doesn't rank the reference to very low values...)

Quote
and I plan to finish putting results together tomorrow.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226076"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Cool. Thanks a lot.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: SirGrey on 2004-07-15 06:41:34
Quote
I don't think so. I will probably remove the ranked references from the results I'll upload, to make sure mean people won't point at others and laugh

Heh.    But it would be interesting for the rank owner to know he has mistaken...
At least I'm interested to know it for my result set...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Gabriel on 2004-07-15 09:12:04
Roberto, you could also wait to be back to your home before processing the results.

You know, the earth will not stop its rotation if you only post results next week...
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-15 09:53:25
Quote
Roberto, you could also wait to be back to your home before processing the results.

You know, the earth will not stop its rotation if you only post results next week...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226129"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Can you prove that ?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-15 11:45:11
At least the delay has provided me enough time to complete the test, and hopefully other people have been able to add their results to the list

I look forward to seeing the smallest confidence intervals the world has ever seen
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: sehested on 2004-07-15 15:28:41
Quote
Roberto, you could also wait to be back to your home before processing the results.

You know, the earth will not stop its rotation if you only post results next week...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226129"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



As Gabriel says, take it easy and enjoy your family gettogether. 

You have nothing to excuse - on the contrary many people are thankful for the professional way you handle the listening tests. 

I'm impressed with your communication skills and the way you manage to obtain near consensus through fact based dialogue, regarding codecs, settings and samples for the listening tests. 

The world will be as happy a place to live in and I will still admire you the same, even if I don't get the results of the listening test until later. 

Enjoy your life... 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: fileman on 2004-07-15 15:47:05
Full ack!
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 15:56:17
Quote
Just throw them away? Aren't the ranked references somehow significant too? I wonder, if somebody ranked a reference doesn't that mean that for him that encoder performs very well? (Well, as long as he doesn't rank the reference to very low values...)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226081"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If somebody ranked the reference, it might also mean he randomly moved sliders up and down. :/

So, to be on the safe side, I discard all results with ranked references that haven't been ABXd to a confidence of 0.05 (chunky makes it very easy to discard such result files. I can't thank Phong enough for his creation).


Thank-you very much for the words of encouragement, guys.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 15:56:33
According to the presentation page, only Vorbis got the special SSRC resampling. If so, was it checked and how and by who, that the other codecs using 32khz sampling didnt have resampling induced quality drop (like vanilla Vorbis) ?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Gabriel on 2004-07-15 15:58:03
Quote
Full ack!


Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 15:58:58
Quote
According to the presentation page, only Vorbis got the special SSRC resampling. If so, was it checked and how and by who, that the other codecs using 32khz sampling didnt have resampling induced quality drop (like vanilla Vorbis) ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226243"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Nobody showed up to test the other codecs. I am grateful (and the vorbis people should also be) to dev0 for checking it out.

Quote
Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.


 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 16:02:46
Quote
Quote
According to the presentation page, only Vorbis got the special SSRC resampling. If so, was it checked and how and by who, that the other codecs using 32khz sampling didnt have resampling induced quality drop (like vanilla Vorbis) ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226243"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Nobody showed up to test the other codecs. I am grateful (and the vorbis people should also be) to dev0 for checking it out.

Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 16:12:46
Quote
Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226248"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As I remember it, you mentioned SSRC resampling needed to be supported in a streaming software to make it's usage meaningful for this test.

dev0 found out it can be done for Vorbis with fb2k. It can't be done for WMA std and QDesign because neither windows media server nor Darwin streaming server use or support SSRC. Shoutcast (probably the most popular MP3 streamer, based on Lame) doesn't use SSRC either. Same thing about Real Broadcaster.

So there.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 16:17:02
Quote
Quote
Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226248"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As I remember it, you mentioned SSRC resampling needed to be supported in a streaming software to make it's usage meaningful for this test.
So there.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226254"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I said, at least, being a reason in order to justify the use of 3rd party component somehow. Before the test I privately said to you the same as here that all resampling should be done with SSRC or none at all. You said you can't consider any of my suggestions anymore because I'm too biased against Vorbis.
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.
Since the other codecs using resampling didnt get tested or treated equally to Vorbis, we can only hope that there's no resampling issues which would affect the results negatively for the other codecs.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-15 17:41:22
Quote
Quote
Full ack!


Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226245"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's exactly what I read first !
 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-15 17:43:58
Quote
Since the other codecs using resampling didnt get tested or treated equally to Vorbis, we can only hope that there's no resampling issues which would affect the results negatively for the other codecs.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226256"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If Vorbis performs bad, nobody will care about it. If it comes first, for sure it's an issue !
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 17:53:14
Quote
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=226256")


True. But you gotta consider that I'm only one person that doesn't do listening tests himself and, particularly on this test, was on a limited time frame. In this aspect, Vorbis can be considered lucky that it had an enthusiatic individual that looked into this issue and found a solution. Unfortunately, WMA, Real and QDesign didn't have anyone to look out for them.

It's similar to the issue with the iTunes MP3 encoder in the MP3 listening test. There has been lots of speculation about iTunes maybe being better in CBR at 128kbps, but noone took the initiative to test VBR vs. CBR while the test was being discussed.

[a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18378&view=findpost&p=181882]http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=181882[/url]
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 17:58:10
Quote
Quote
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226256"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's similar to the issue with the iTunes MP3 encoder in the MP3 listening test. There has been lots of speculation about iTunes maybe being better in CBR at 128kbps, but noone took the initiative to test VBR vs. CBR while the test was being discussed.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226292"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Imo it was not similar. In your example it was about internal encoding setting. In resampling issue it was about the use of external 3rd party component which is possible to use for all resampled codecs.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-15 18:11:25
I thought this had been discussed into the ground a couple of pages ago?

Vorbis was the only encoder that was shown to have issues with its internal resampler, so there should be no need to use SSRC with the other codecs in the test.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 18:13:28
Quote
I thought this had been discussed into the ground a couple of pages ago?

Vorbis was the only encoder that was shown to have issues with its internal resampler, so there should be no need to use SSRC with the other codecs in the test.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226297"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Eh, how do you know if there was need or not if it was not tested!
It is perfectly possible that this issue is a non-issue, but without testing we simply don't know, thus if not tested, we should treat the codecs equally. This is my opinion.
So, even if this resampling issue turned out to be irrelevant regarding the other codecs, this imo shows somewhat questionable testing practice, especially considering that there is a 3rd party component involved.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: elmar3rd on 2004-07-15 18:17:56
Ogg Vorbis is quite new, open source and it's development is in progress.
I understood the SSRC issue always in such a way, that for this test, Ogg Vorbis samples were prepared, that show the potential at 32 kbps in comparison to established codecs.
That's quite fair for a codec in development.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: JohnV on 2004-07-15 18:19:58
Quote
Ogg Vorbis is quite new, open source and it's development is in progress.
I understood the SSRC issue always in such a way, that for this test, Ogg Vorbis samples were prepared, that show the potential at 32 kbps in comparison to established codecs.
That's quite fair for a codec in development.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226299"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you ask from Monty, he will tell you that Vorbis is about 10 years old project of his.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: maikmerten on 2004-07-15 18:20:13
Quote
That's quite fair for a codec in development.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226299"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ogg Vorbis is not the only codec that´s in development.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Big_Berny on 2004-07-15 19:22:27
I was away (holiday) the last weeks. And now I would like to make the test, too. But in the first posting you write that the test is scheduled to end at July 11th but the title says "OPEN".

So is the test open or closed already?

Thanx
Big_Berny
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-15 19:32:40
Quote
I was away (holiday) the last weeks. And now I would like to make the test, too. But in the first posting you write that the test is scheduled to end at July 11th but the title says "OPEN".

So is the test open or closed already?

Thanx
Big_Berny[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226320"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I plan to start calculating results this afternoon, so yes, you can pretty safely consider it closed :/
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Big_Berny on 2004-07-15 21:40:51
Quote
I plan to start calculating results this afternoon, so yes, you can pretty safely consider it closed :/
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226322"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Wll, that's bad news... Sorry, that I couldn't do the test. I hope you have enough results!

Big_Berny
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Tang on 2004-07-20 16:23:09
Still no results? 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: ep0ch on 2004-07-21 18:31:57
rjamorim you're being very quiet, you OK? or have you gone into shock cos of the results?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Mac on 2004-07-21 20:45:45
Quote
rjamorim you're being very quiet, you OK? or have you gone into shock cos of the results?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227861"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Too much wine at the family parties?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rp552 on 2004-07-21 20:46:39
erhm... i know 56k is slow, but shouldn't the results be in by now? 

anyway looking forward to the results, thanks for the effort.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: vinnie97 on 2004-07-22 13:58:20
Hope everything's OK.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rp552 on 2004-07-22 20:00:56
me too, the suspense is killing me
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rpop on 2004-07-23 02:17:45
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Off-topic posts split here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=24159).[/span]
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: glistener on 2004-07-24 16:05:07
Hey, what happened to rjamorim? Now, even his website http://www.rjamorim.com/ (http://www.rjamorim.com/) is down.

EDIT: His site is online again
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Yaztromo on 2004-07-24 16:43:18
Quote
Hey, what happened to rjamorim? Now, even his website http://www.rjamorim.com/ (http://www.rjamorim.com/) is down.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228615"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Can someone who knows him give him a call to make sure he's okay.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: Cyaneyes on 2004-07-25 03:38:17
Quote
Can someone who knows him give him a call to make sure he's okay.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228623"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ditto.. he hasn't made a single post on HA in over a week.. most unusual for Roberto 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-25 16:29:36
It's soo good to feel missed...


Really sorry, people. I spent the last week completely computerless at Rio de Janeiro.

I'm back home now. Hopefully I'll release results in a few hours.

Quote
Can someone who knows him give him a call to make sure he's okay.


In case someone is wondering, my phone number is +55 41 2338428
Use it wisely

Regards;

Roberto.
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: robUx4 on 2004-07-25 16:42:47
Good to see you back 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: DAvenger on 2004-07-25 16:46:23
Quote
In case someone is wondering, my phone number is +55 41 2338428
Use it wisely
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228842"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


May I call you when I feel lonely? 
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: maikmerten on 2004-07-25 16:56:28
Quote
In case someone is wondering, my phone number is +55 41 2338428
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228842"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I predict you will need to redirect incoming calls to a call-center the next few days
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-26 00:18:04
Quote
May I call you when I feel lonely? 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228846"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As long as you don't try to woo me...

Quote
I predict you will need to redirect incoming calls to a call-center the next few days
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=228851"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


No worries. I like to receive phone calls from my foreign friends
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: glistener on 2004-07-26 01:47:31
Now that the results are available (thanks, rjamorim! ), I wanted to know how I ranked the samples. The results files are decrypted and it seems that I need to know which sample corresponds to which codec. I know thatAnd I know that 3, 6, 7 and 8 are WMA, MP3pro, Real and QDesign. But which one is which?

EDIT: Moved the above to the correct thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=24311&view=findpost&p=228958).
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: DavidHart on 2004-07-31 04:05:07
I have a minor question about the tests. Why couldn't ABR be used rather than CBR? Is that because ABR is still a bit variable? Would the results be much different?

Also here is another question. For mono recordings (books and such) are you better off recording a WMA 8 (I can't do WMA 9 on my Win 98SE computer) at 32 or Lame 3.96 with a --alt-preset 32 -m m. I know I'm comparing WMA CBR to Lame ABR but does anybody have a good idea about which would be better?

I know there are some go threads HA about audio book recordings but the best one states right off that CBR as a requirement (probably due to a streaming requirement). I'm just wondering if we had to compare WMA CBR vs a LAME ABR at the same rate, which would be better?
Title: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN
Post by: rjamorim on 2004-07-31 15:30:25
Quote
I have a minor question about the tests. Why couldn't ABR be used rather than CBR? Is that because ABR is still a bit variable? Would the results be much different?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=230473"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I believe no codec offers ABR at such low bitrates.

QDesign and Real are CBR by nature. WMA only offers "Bitrate VBR" (their name for ABR) down to 64kbps. Nero and MP3pro are either VBR or CBR. I think Lame and Vorbis don't offer good quality ABR, if they offer it at all, at such bitrates either.

Quote
Also here is another question. For mono recordings (books and such) are you better off recording a WMA 8 (I can't do WMA 9 on my Win 98SE computer) at 32 or Lame 3.96 with a --alt-preset 32 -m m. I know I'm comparing WMA CBR to Lame ABR but does anybody have a good idea about which would be better?


For voice recordings, I believe your best bet would be Speex or WMA Voice (Acelp.net). If you need to go with either WMA or MP3, I guess WMA would perform better.
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021