audibility of insane & standard presets 2005-01-04 15:45:27 Over on Quadraphonic Quad I've gotten some stone mp3 skeptics to at least consider the possibility that mp3s *can* be audibly identical to their sources. They're willing to take a test of the matter, allowing me to use 'the best' encoding. I'm going to make some test discs containing tracks ripped via EAC and encoded with the HA recommended LAME compiles at insane and standard presets. NB I haven't made the claim that an mp3 will always be audibly identical to its source -- only that it *can* be, dependent on several criteria. They find even that modest claim very hard to believe.My own experience is that I, and a few folks that I've tested in a quasi-ABX protocol, am unable to reliably tell the original from the APS encoded mp3 using a variety of sources. As such I've never even bothered with API, which I've always seen referred to as transparent. But my exhcange with the QQ folk got me wondering, *has* anyone here (or elsewhere) ever conclusively demonstrated an ability to identify a well-encoded 320 kbps mp3 from its source? If so, what track(s) were used? I'd like to give my testees at least the option of using stringent test tracks, in addition to track sof their own choosing.The same question goes for --alt preset standard, btw -- I looked but didn't find any evidence that it *isn't* transparent, but I may not have looked hard enough. And in my own tests so far I may not have used the most revealing material.Finally, is there a list of 'tough' tracks (e.g. as used for the more widespread 128 kbps tests), and any place to download them as .flac files?