Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My Lossy vs Lossless ABX Experiment
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My Lossy vs Lossless ABX Experiment

post #1 of 42
Thread Starter 
I have recently started a blog and my first topic was whether I can tell the difference between lossy and lossless music. So I did three posts on the topic and just finished typing up my discussion today.

I found seven good samples from head-fi to use and made them into various bit rates of mp3s and then did an ABX test on all the mp3s versus the lossless copy.

My results? I was able to successfully differentiate all the way up to 320 kbps for two of the samples, up to 192 kbps for one of the samples, up to 128 kbps for one of the samples and finally just to 96 kbps for three of the samples. This is all with statistical significance (p < 0.05).

I was very surprised by the fact I could differentiate 320 kbps from lossless as I had previously though people who said they could were talking out of their ass. It is possible, and anyone can do it (seeing as I have no special talents or abilities with music and am relatively new to audiophilia). The only thing which may have helped are my HD 650's.

So anyway, this may be a blatant advertisement, but you can find all the details of my experiment at my blog (links below). My first post was an introduction to lossless vs lossy in which I went into great detail with how lossless audio is encoded (which may interest some people), then I did a materials and methods post (how I would do it and what would I would use) and finally a results and discussion post. I have included all the raw output from Foobar for those that are interested along with graphs of my results.

Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion

Let me know what you think!
post #2 of 42
mp3 is a plague...I wish it never existed

I'll look into it
post #3 of 42
Thread Starter 
Haha, it has/had it's uses... like on the 128mb mp3 players we used to use (I still have mine!).
post #4 of 42
What is frustrating is that with storage being dirt cheap these days, MP3 is still the dominant format, that or AAC...not even ALAC. FLAC/ALAC need to take control of the market.
post #5 of 42
Thread Starter 
Yep, I agree. With bandwidth and storage being so cheap there isn't an excuse anymore. iTunes should be lossless. I know I won't be making any more purchases there until they sell ALAC.
post #6 of 42
see what 320kbit mp3 does to your music: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/5785853-post42.html

del *.mp3 is my best advice..
post #7 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zanth View Post
What is frustrating is that with storage being dirt cheap these days, MP3 is still the dominant format, that or AAC...not even ALAC. FLAC/ALAC need to take control of the market.
What ticks me off about aac though is that for some reason foobar doesnt play them gapless which is why I sometimes rip to mp3 when doing gapless albums. I tend to only rip to flac when its reference quality sounding stuff because my laptop only has 160 gigs
post #8 of 42
external 2.5" HD is your friend I have a 500 GB that I crate to and from work every day, firewire to boot! Works so very well and I'm not hindered by the smallish internal drive. I didn't realize AAC and gapless had issues. I admit, these days most of my listening if AAC is via the PS3 or some Mac app like Cog. I don't run Foobar often as I'm rarely in Windows.
post #9 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zanth View Post
external 2.5" HD is your friend I have a 500 GB that I crate to and from work every day, firewire to boot! Works so very well and I'm not hindered by the smallish internal drive. I didn't realize AAC and gapless had issues. I admit, these days most of my listening if AAC is via the PS3 or some Mac app like Cog. I don't run Foobar often as I'm rarely in Windows.
aha but when I need lossless, CD is my friend
post #10 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by donunus View Post
aha but when I need lossless, CD is my friend
I used to think that until I could have my entire CD collection with me on a terabyte drive!
post #11 of 42
Thats True. I will do that in the Future. I'm too lazy to start re ripping my music again
post #12 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
see what 320kbit mp3 does to your music: ...
Yay, sine wave music! The actual sine wave looks pretty much unaltered imho. D'oh!


@Vel: As we can see you were able to differentiate 2 out of these 7 test samples. Some of the test files aren't even what I'd call music (heh, just my opinion), especially the "WelcomeToDrexciya 2 second in easy" which as the name suggest was easy to test (think you've mentioned that).
2/7, thats about 29%. I really wonder how low this number would sink if you'd redo the test with some random files of your music collection.
(I'm not saying there's something wrong with this test.)

Of course there's a difference between the original and mp3 file because you're trading file size for quality. And that difference can be heard in some cases. Thus I'd never archive music with mp3, or any other lossy format.

Oh, did I mention that iTunes mp3 enc. is inferior to lame?
post #13 of 42
I can differentiate between 320 and FLAC only on tracks that contain great complexity - FLAC just feels so much more transparent and clean. I can, however, always differentiate between 256 and FLAC always.

That said, there is nothing that stops me from enjoying a library of music encoded at 192 - music is music when I'm not doing ABX testing or analytical listening, just sit back and enjoy the music despite the bitrate
post #14 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolink24 View Post
I can differentiate between 320 and FLAC only on tracks that contain great complexity - FLAC just feels so much more transparent and clean. I can, however, always differentiate between 256 and FLAC always.
No.

Quote:
That said, there is nothing that stops me from enjoying a library of music encoded at 192 - music is music when I'm not doing ABX testing or analytical listening, just sit back and enjoy the music despite the bitrate
Yes.
post #15 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post
Yay, sine wave music! The actual sine wave looks pretty much unaltered imho. D'oh!
well, look at the THD/THD+N rates, it's pointless to go for the best headphones/source when you settle down for distorted audio files. ibuds FTW
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My Lossy vs Lossless ABX Experiment