Transparency: Public Listening Tests vs Anecdotes and My Experiences 2019-11-16 22:14:05 In my own listening tests (admittedly on only a few songs), I've found Opus 96 kbps reliably transparent. Others' observations on HA seem to agree. Yet, in the public 96 kbps listening test, most samples were not found to be transparent at this bitrate. I also have found Vorbis near-transparent at this bitrate--I can sometimes pick out subtle artifacts in critical listening but never notice anything obvious. Yet, Vorbis scored worse than Opus in the same listening test.Similarly, 128 kbps AAC (Fhg) seems transparent to me even with CBR and even 96 is close. Yet, the most recent listening test at this bitrate suggests various AAC codecs perform similarly to Opus@96 kbps.Why do public listening tests seem so much more pessimistic than my experiences or, in the case of Opus, others' experiences on this forum?Are exceptionally-hard samples typically selected for listening tests?Do listening test participants typically have an exceptionally good ear for subtle artifacts?Have codecs gradually improved with time such that the listening tests I cite are outdated?