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: Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion (Read 55317 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #75 –
Quote
I considered adding some voice-only sample (from a movie, maybe) since that would be interesting for people doing DVD rips. But I guess that would be too transparent at 128kbps...

Spoken voice on top of background/ambiant noise or background music would be interesting

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #76 –
Hi All.

I discovered a problem when trying to burn a CD while converting from  MP3 to ATRAC3(plus). I used the Sony program, SonicStage (Simple Burner) version 1.0.00.14180, that came with my player. I thought that this might be relevant when deciding whether or not to include ATRAC3 in the tests.

The problem occurs during the conversion phase, the first operation that creates an image file from the source file, and before it writes to disk. Once SonicStage SB encounters a problem file, it aborts the process, and you lose all of the image files that had already been converted. Nothing gets written to the CD. This is a critical shortcoming. The whole process of converting files is extremely slow - more than an hour to fill a single CD. If after an hour of processing files, it encounters a single problem file, it aborts and you lose everything.

For me, SonicStage SB could not handle converting APS or VBR MP3 files unless the maximum bit rate was set to 128 or less. What I find interesting is that it had no problems dealing with ABR 128. No problems with alt-preset insane (API) either.

Pentium 4 1.6 GHz
TDK VeloCD 48 x 16/24 x 48
Kansas: Leftoverture: Magnum Opus

APS (92-128): pass
APS (128-160): fail
APS (128-192): fail
APS (128-256): fail

API (320): pass

VBR default (64-128): pass
VBR default (64-160): fail

AP CBR 192 (192): pass



AP ABR 128 (64-320): pass
AP ABR 160 (64-320): fail
AP ABR 160 (64-160): fail
AP ABR 192 (64-320): fail
AP ABR 192 (64-224): fail


Can anyone confirm these findings? Perhaps this problem doesn't occur when using the regular SoundStage or ATRAC3 instead of ATRAC3(plus). I don't know.


- Scott

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #77 –
Quote
The 12 samples from the AAC test will remain pretty much the same, and the remaining 6 samples could be:

-2 classical ones

which would mean that there will be 4 "classical" style samples (with mahler and hongroise from the aac test) - more than 20% of the samples

wouldnt this mean a bias towards wma9 (or towards a specific music style)? at least wma9 pro seems to have been heavily tuned towards classic music (as the last multiformat test showed)

Quote
I considered adding some voice-only sample (from a movie, maybe) since that would be interesting for people doing DVD rips

great
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #78 –
Quote
which would mean that there will be 4 "classical" style samples (with mahler and hongroise from the aac test) - more than 20% of the samples

wouldnt this mean a bias towards wma9 (or towards a specific music style)? at least wma9 pro seems to have been heavily tuned towards classic music (as the last multiformat test showed)

I don't think so, because even if the samples can all be lumped together as "classical",  they are very different among themselves.

Hongroise is piano solo, and Mahler is a full orchestra. I was planning, for the other two samples, a chamber orchestra and an opera. I never tested an opera sample, and I would be very interested on results.

Can someone contribute samples of said styles? Guruboolez?

Quote
great


Past tense. I'm not considering it for this test anymore, although It would probably be an interesting sample for the 48kbps test

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #79 –
Quote
I don't think so, because even if the samples can all be lumped together as "classical",  they are very different among themselves.

if you say so 

Quote
Past tense. I'm not considering it for this test anymore, although It would probably be an interesting sample for the 48kbps test

bad 
btw did you drop the idea of conducing a speech codec test? would be more interesting than another low bitrate test (bitrates hardly used i think), which aac (with sbr+ps) will win anyways imo...
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #80 –
I'd be interested in another punkrock/hardcore sample personally, since this genre is quite underrepresented right now. I'll post some new samples later tonight.
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #81 –
Quote
btw did you drop the idea of conducing a speech codec test?

Mostly, yes. I am pretty certain there will be not enough interest. Just look at the speech codecs forum and you'll understand.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #82 –
Quote
I'd be interested in another punkrock/hardcore sample personally, since this genre is quite underrepresented right now.

Wouldn't gone and mybloodrusts already represent this "heavy stuff" you guys listen to?

I'm not into these styles, so I really don't know :B

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #83 –
just a quick question.

Why ATRAC3 and no ATRAC3 Plus?

thanks

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #84 –
Quote
Why ATRAC3 and no ATRAC3 Plus?

The only bitrates available for Atrac3 plus in SonicStage are 48, 64 and 256kbps 

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #85 –
I cast my vote for a trance sample and some celtic/irish stuff.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #86 –
Which ATRAC is ATRAC3?  IIRC there are several varients of ATRAC3 and I can never keep them straight.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #87 –
Quote
I cast my vote for a trance sample and some celtic/irish stuff.

Sounds good. Please provide samples, if you have

Everyone is invited to provide samples you believe can fit in the 6 open slots.

Quote
Which ATRAC is ATRAC3? IIRC there are several varients of ATRAC3 and I can never keep them straight.


Atrac versioning is a mess. I'm using the version in SonicStage 2, and hoping that is what I should be using. :B

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #88 –
I vote for my Rosemary sample. It's not only from my favourite song but also a problematic sample I think.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #89 –
Quote
Quote
I cast my vote for a trance sample and some celtic/irish stuff.

Sounds good. Please provide samples, if you have

Please see this thread. I uploaded 8 samples fitting both categories. I'd be happy to provide some more if you like.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #90 –
Quote
The only bitrates available for Atrac3 plus in SonicStage are 48, 64 and 256kbps


I'm using SonicStage Simple Burner. I believe it uses Atrac3 plus. Under 'configuration', it provides for the following bit rates only:

48
64
66
105
132


- Scott

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #91 –
Quote from: rjamorim,Apr 4 2004, 08:21 PM
Why ATRAC3 and no ATRAC3 Plus?

The only bitrates available for Atrac3 plus in SonicStage are 48, 64 and 256kbps  [/quote]
Weird...

Thanks for the info.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #92 –
Quote
Quote
which would mean that there will be 4 "classical" style samples (with mahler and hongroise from the aac test) - more than 20% of the samples

wouldnt this mean a bias towards wma9 (or towards a specific music style)? at least wma9 pro seems to have been heavily tuned towards classic music (as the last multiformat test showed)

I don't think so, because even if the samples can all be lumped together as "classical",  they are very different among themselves.

i just stumbled over ff123's old 64kbps listening test and one of the conclusions he had was "If one compares all classical chamber music, wma8 might come out near the top"

of course someone can always say "lets listen to 18 "hard rock" samples, there well be no bias towards "hard rock", cause they all are so different among themselves", but still there are similarities if you compare styles like rock vs. techno vs. classic aso...

still 4 classical style (yeah the broad range definition) samples (as i said more than 20% of the samples) are too much, even the slightlies bias towards a codec should be avoided imho


instead i would prefer a move towards other music styles like one (or four  ) irish music sample would be great, also tigre's chanchan sample sounds interesting
also i would vote for taking in the rebel sample and the destitute sample from harashin (uploaded here
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #93 –
Hello,

I would like to ask some questions, concerning the consequences deriving from the increase of the samples for this test and most importantly about the use of the ANOVA / Fisher LSD method to analyse the results, since there are some things that I don't understand and I would very much appreciate it, if someone could help me out.

But first of all, let me cite an example from the recent 128kbps mp3 test, where a specific sample (riteofspring) was evaluated by a very low number of listeners (11).


Quote
                                   Rite of spring

Listeners | Xing Lame iTunes Gogo FhG  AActive
-----------|---------------------------------------------------
1             |   5.0     5.0     5.0     5.0     5.0     5.0
2             | ---    ---      ---     1.5      ---     ---
3             |   2.5     2.5     3.5     3.0     4.0     4.2
4             |   2.0     3.0     2.2     3.6     4.4     4.0
5             |   4.7     4.4     4.9     4.8     4.2     4.8
6             | ---     4.7      ---     4.5    4.6     4.1
7             |   1.0     1.5     1.0     4.0     2.0     3.5
8             |   4.1     2.8     2.5     3.0     1.0     2.0
9             |   3.5     1.4     4.0     3.1     1.5     1.7
10           |   4.2     4.0     4.6     4.6     2.2     4.2
11           |   1.3     3.7     1.5     1.0     2.5     1.8
---------------------------------------------------------------                    
ANOVA    | 3.50  3.86  3.47  2.45  3.36  4.29
Ranking  |  (3)       (2)     (4)     (6)    (5)     (1)


In the following table we can see how many times,
each codec was placed  in a particular position.


                                 Listener Rating

                  |  1st  2nd  3rd  4th  5th  6th
--------------|-------------------------------------------------
Xing            |  2     2      1      0     1      3
                  |
Lame          |  3     0      2      3      0      2
                  |
iTunes         |    4     0      1      3     0      1
                  |
Gogo          |    3     2      3      2     0      1
                  |
FhG             |    2     3      1      0     1      3
                  |
AActive       |     2     4      1       2     0      1
--------------|----------------------------------------------------


So, can we draw any safe conclusions about the performance of the different codecs, by examining the above tables? Well, as far as I can understand it, I don't think so, and I surely don't think that we can conclude that iTunes should be fourth and AActive first or that Gogo is the worst by far, since only one listener came to that conclusion, while seven out of nine listeners found it better than Lame. So why does the ANOVA / Fisher LSD analysis indicate that it is the worst of all? Is there something that I am missing?

Is it because the ANOVA / Fisher LSD analysis produces very high error rates when dealing with contradicting and irregular data such as the above?

If the above is the case, will the upcoming increase of the samples combined with the difficulty of this test, lead to examples like this and if yes, shouldn't we discard them?

Can we use erroneous results such as this, to calculate the final ratings?

Will the use of an anchor make the distribution of the ratings more normal and thus provide more accurate results?

Should we consider revising the way we analyze the results or am I just posting nonsense and make a complete fool of myself?



Kind regards;


-George.
Let us so live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry. -Mark Twain

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #94 –
Quote
Quote
I'd be interested in another punkrock/hardcore sample personally, since this genre is quite underrepresented right now.

Wouldn't gone and mybloodrusts already represent this "heavy stuff" you guys listen to?

I'm not into these styles, so I really don't know :B

mybloodrusts should be replaced, since its bad recording quality is somewhat sub-par even for this genre. I prepared three alternatives, which are similiar in style:

A Case of Grenada - The Secret in The Sound
from 'The Evidence':
acaseofgrenada-thesecretinthesound.sample18sec.flac

The Blood Brothers - Guitarmy
from 'Burn Piano Island, Burn!'
bloodbrothers-guitarmy.sample12sec.flac

Give Up The Ghost - Since Always
from 'We're Down 'Til We're Underground'
giveuptheghost-sincealways.sample18sec.flac

I'd suggest the last one as a replacement, mostly because it produces some very interesting artifacts, but the others should be suitable too.
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #95 –
Quote
So, can we draw any safe conclusions about the performance of the different codecs, by examining the above tables? Well, as far as I can understand it, I don't think so, and I surely don't think that we can conclude that iTunes should be fourth and AActive first or that Gogo is the worst by far, since only one listener came to that conclusion, while seven out of nine listeners found it better than Lame. So why does the ANOVA / Fisher LSD analysis indicate that it is the worst of all? Is there something that I am missing?

If I recalculate the result based on the score table given by you, GoGo averages higher than LAME. That contradicts with what the result says. So I don't get it either. Perhaps your score table is wrong?

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #96 –
Thanks for all the submitted samples. I'll check them out today and tomorrow.


And I'm still waiting for classical samples. Anyone? :/

Regards;

Roberto.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #97 –
Quote
And I'm still waiting for classical samples. Anyone? :/

:B

i give up trying to convince rjamorim, first he always says no way, he wont do as you suggest (at least in my case its that way) and after a month he says "yeah, lets take atrac3"...
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #98 –
Quote
first he always says no way, he wont do as you suggest (at least in my case its that way) and after a month he says "yeah, lets take atrac3"...

Bullshit. From the start I said I prefered an anchor instead of Atrac3. And I istill prefer. But if the vast majority wants Atrac3, I'll oblige.

I never said no way about Atrac3 in this test.

Now, I don't see the vast majority wanting to ditch classical samples. Instead, I see the biggest authority in listening tests in this forum (and one of the forum members I respect the most) suggesting them.

Multiformat @ 128kbps - test discussion

Reply #99 –
Quote
And I'm still waiting for classical samples. Anyone? :/

I uploaded Bartok_strings. However it's already known by some Vorbis encoders, still is a "good" sample for the people who are not familiar with classical music.(like me)

EDIT: grammar