Skip to main content
Topic: Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus? (Read 35106 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #25
guitarboy have you tested any AAC encoded with true vbr settings?
With the custom set up of aac on itunes I used 320 k/bits with vbr encoding. For Lame I didn't since I couldn't get to 320 k/bits.


That is definitely not true vbr, it's vbr constrained. I suppose you're on Windows, you should use qtaacenc to use true vbr =)

Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #26
Not to mention that it's difficult to imagine a way in which you "couldn't get [LAME] to 320 [kb/s]".

Slightly understandable if you were using foobar2000 as the frontend, in which case you just set up a custom command line with -b320.

In any case, make the comparison fair by using bitrates that are equal (CBR) or as close as possible (VBR).

Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #27
for evaluating your hearing and developing a curve that roughly approximates the frequency response of your ears.


Not to go off on a tangent but there is a rather large difference between hearing a single tone at a certain volume/frequency and actually hearing music at a frequency range when combined with other sounds at different frequency levels (ie real music).  People aren't buying iPods or other audio equipment to hear whining sounds all day, they are listening to music.  Hence why you can get some information regarding your ears with such tests but it still does not give you any inclination as to your abilities with lossy encoded music.  Hence why I think you wont be seeing such a thread on this site.

Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #28
for evaluating your hearing and developing a curve that roughly approximates the frequency response of your ears.


Not to go off on a tangent but there is a rather large difference between hearing a single tone at a certain volume/frequency and actually hearing music at a frequency range when combined with other sounds at different frequency levels (ie real music).  People aren't buying iPods or other audio equipment to hear whining sounds all day, they are listening to music.  Hence why you can get some information regarding your ears with such tests but it still does not give you any inclination as to your abilities with lossy encoded music.  Hence why I think you wont be seeing such a thread on this site.


Point taken.  ..I understand that there is a big difference between listening Beethoven's Ninth on a subway car and taking a test in a controlled environment. I also understand the difference between simple and complex wave forms.I still found the test interesting...If not the test then the many links on that sight concerning sound....I would like to have access to a test that tests hearing using complex waveforms  and different noise thresholds but I do not know of any.Perhaps someone knows where or how ABX tests can be conducted(or any form of tests) that include a variable of different noises(ie. Not Music) ALONG WITH THE ENCODED and compressed music program. Or if the results of such a test exists  I don't think it would be a good idea to bring my laptop down to Suburban Station in Philly and set up shop.That's just begging for a mugging where I come from

Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #29
Point taken.  ..I understand that there is a big difference between listening Beethoven's Ninth on a subway car and taking a test in a controlled environment. I also understand the difference between simple and complex wave forms.I still found the test interesting...If not the test then the many links on that sight concerning sound....I would like to have access to a test that tests hearing using complex waveforms  and different noise thresholds but I do not know of any.Perhaps someone knows where or how ABX tests can be conducted(or any form of tests) that include a variable of different noises(ie. Not Music) ALONG WITH THE ENCODED and compressed music program. Or if the results of such a test exists  I don't think it would be a good idea to bring my laptop down to Suburban Station in Philly and set up shop.That's just begging for a mugging where I come from

The point that was being made was with respect to our ability to hear high frequencies that are part of the music itself. If you want to perform a real meaningful test of your hearing then that is not difficult.

First select a piece of music that has high frequency content (other members may be able to suggest some).

Then if you have access to an audio editor, process the file with various lowpass filters applied. If you don't have access to an audio editor then use LAME to encode to 320 kbps cbr with various lowpass filters (and yes, I know that the psy model may remove some high frequencies too).

Now try to ABX the different cutoff frequencies. You may be surprised at how much lower this ends up relative to your ability to hear individual tones.

Re: Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #30
After 5 tests I got only one wrong proving I could tell a difference.
This is hardly proof.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=16295

Please do not post about quality differences between codecs until you have sufficient test results.

You need to increase the number of tests to at least 10 or 12.  Please read the link I gave you.

Sorry for digging up this old post, but I was searching for something and it came up. I've browsed these forums time to time over the years, and the same impression keeps coming to my mind - That this forum is not the most welcoming of outside views.

I've seen this same moderator tell people their "lyin' ears" can't be used to determine what sounds better to them, but the only way to make that determination is with a DBT.

So, the poster then does a DBT, only to be told by this moderator that (since his views differed from the mod's) that, well you just didn't do enough of them!

It would seem to me, the prevailing "rules" of this place is if your findings disagree with what this mod believes, you are wrong. No ifs, ans, or buts. You are wrong until you agree with him and his minions.

Again, I have seen this attitude over, and over, and over on this site. To me, it is very condescending.

So (I probably don't really need to ask for this, after what I've just stated) could the lords of all sound here please delete my account, and I'll just find a place that is more welcoming of differing views, and that allows people to trust their ears without being put down for it.

Thanks.

Re: Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #31
Given your inability to comprehend the simple rules that you agreed to when you signed up, I doubt you will be missed, but accounts are never deleted.

 

Re: Mp3 320 k/bits VS. AAC Itunes Plus?

Reply #32
Seriously.  Doing an ABX test and posting the results is beyond easy and the people that were making those absurd claims never did that...  Try to ABX two files using the settings that were posted and if you can find a difference, please post it.  I will be amazed and will give you praise.
JXL

Also, the reason he is being strict is because this forum is based on facts, not pseudo science.  If you post an opinion on quality, you need to back it up.  Simple enough?

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018