Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › BLIND TEST: Lossless vs. MP3 320
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BLIND TEST: Lossless vs. MP3 320

Poll Results: BLIND TEST: Lossless vs. MP3 320 kbps

 
  • 27% (40)
    A is Lossless
  • 42% (63)
    B is Lossless
  • 30% (45)
    No Difference
148 Total Votes  
post #1 of 107
Thread Starter 

One minute clip of Boogie on Reggae Woman off the 2011 Audio Fidelity release of Fulfillingness' First Finale...

 

$ flac -d Boogie.on.Reggae.Woman.flac

flac 1.2.1, Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007 Josh Coalson
flac comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software, and you are
welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. Type `flac' for details.

Boogie.on.Reggae.Woman.flac: done

 

$ sox --version
sox: SoX v14.3.2

 

$ sox Boogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav fade 1 trim 0 1:00

 

 
$ lame --preset insane --noreplaygain xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav
LAME 3.99.4 64bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 20094 Hz - 20627 Hz
Encoding xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav to xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (4.4x) 320 kbps qval=3
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
2298/2298 (100%)| 0:01/ 0:01| 0:01/ 0:01| 40.560x| 0:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
320.0 96.4 3.6 71.1 15.2 13.8
Writing LAME Tag...done

 

 
$ lame --decode xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.mp3 yBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav
input: xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.mp3
(44.1 kHz, 2 channels, MPEG-1 Layer III)
output: yBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav (16 bit, Microsoft WAVE)
skipping initial 1105 samples (encoder+decoder delay)
skipping final 191 samples (encoder padding-decoder delay)
Frame# 2298/2298 320 kbps L R

 

$ mv xBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav ?.wav

 

$ mv yBoogie.on.Reggae.Woman.wav ?.wav

 

 

 

levelsm.png

 

 

 

Download A.wav (10.09 MB)

Download B.wav (10.09 MB)

 

 

UPDATE: Files fixed. Credit to xnor.

 


Edited by adamlau - 2/9/12 at 6:48am
post #2 of 107

Groovy, I like that track.

 

Replay gain not necessary as it applies the same correction value.

 

Might be something dodgy going on with the files, I can't remember the last time I've heard a compression artifact like that from a 320kbps bitrate encode.

 

ABX (Click to show)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.8
2012/02/09 17:31:27

File A: C:\Users\Alice\Desktop\A.wav
File B: C:\Users\Alice\Desktop\B.wav

17:31:27 : Test started.
17:31:32 : 01/01  50.0%
17:31:38 : 02/02  25.0%
17:31:45 : 03/03  12.5%
17:31:50 : 04/04  6.3%
17:31:57 : 05/05  3.1%
17:32:07 : 06/06  1.6%
17:32:12 : 07/07  0.8%
17:32:18 : 08/08  0.4%
17:32:29 : 09/09  0.2%
17:32:35 : 10/10  0.1%
17:32:42 : 11/11  0.0%
17:32:49 : 12/12  0.0%
17:32:57 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 12/12 (0.0%)

 

post #3 of 107
I'd remove the poll and count the number of successful abx logs instead and if the logs show success include the posters opinion if A or B is the lossless file.

edit: ugh, my headphones are dying frown.gif rattling driver..
Edited by xnor - 2/9/12 at 1:47am
post #4 of 107

Bad test, there is an easily audible click at the beginning of the MP3 compressed file.

 

post #5 of 107

Got a bit lazy - and clicked wrong result on #19 redface.gif

 

 

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.10
2012/02/09 23:47:52
 
File A: E:\A.wav
File B: E:\B.wav
 
23:47:52 : Test started.
23:49:29 : 01/01  50.0%
23:49:39 : 02/02  25.0%
23:49:47 : 03/03  12.5%
23:49:53 : 04/04  6.3%
23:50:00 : 05/05  3.1%
23:50:07 : 06/06  1.6%
23:50:17 : 07/07  0.8%
23:50:22 : 08/08  0.4%
23:50:25 : 09/09  0.2%
23:50:35 : 10/10  0.1%
23:50:47 : 11/11  0.0%
23:50:56 : 12/12  0.0%
23:51:13 : 13/13  0.0%
23:51:17 : 14/14  0.0%
23:51:25 : 15/15  0.0%
23:51:31 : 16/16  0.0%
23:51:38 : 17/17  0.0%
23:51:42 : 18/18  0.0%
23:51:47 : 18/19  0.0%
23:52:10 : 19/20  0.0%
23:52:15 : Test finished.
 
 ---------- 
Total: 19/20 (0.0%)
 
 
stv014 is right - audible artifact at the beginning.
post #6 of 107

Almost immediately, I think I noticed a difference. And that's just on my computer speakers. Maybe I'm wrong and might change my mind once I try it with headphones. I probably should have waited to test with headphones, just in case.

post #7 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post

stv014 is right - audible artifact at the beginning.

Indeed. So I guess we can close this test.

Here's an overlay of the wave form of the mp3 (red) and wav (blue):
513

Quote:
Originally Posted by CC Lemon View Post

Almost immediately, I think I noticed a difference.
This is a joke, right?
Edited by xnor - 2/9/12 at 3:46am
post #8 of 107
Thread Starter 

Sooo...Is A, or B the lossless file smile.gif ?

post #9 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

This is a joke, right?


Like I said, this is just through my computer speakers at a low to medium volume. I've tried to hear the click from the mp3 but I can't hear it. They aren't terrible speakers, but they aren't amazing either. I doubt it's something I would notice on this set up, honestly. I was being lazy and didn't feel like getting my headphones out to test, so I figured I'd just give it a listen with the speakers and one seemed better. 

post #10 of 107
adamlau fixed the files, so please try again now. The click artifact should be gone. Post abx logs if possible.

edit: Turns out the mp3 files were fine but lame --decode seems to be buggy. Decoding the file with fb2k doesn't add this artifact in the beginning. More info over at HA (mp3 general forum).
Edited by xnor - 2/9/12 at 7:13am
post #11 of 107
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Thanks for the new files!  Obviously much harder.  Not sure what to make of my own results.  Thankfully this track was much easier on the ears to listen to.

 

abx 9Feb12 320k vs lossless.JPG

 

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.10
2012/02/09 11:59:29

File A: D:\Downloads\320k vs lossless A.wav
File B: D:\Downloads\320k vs lossless B.wav

11:59:29 : Test started.
12:01:56 : 01/01  50.0%
12:02:33 : 01/02  75.0%
12:03:27 : 02/03  50.0%
12:03:45 : 02/04  68.8%
12:04:19 : 03/05  50.0%
12:04:41 : 04/06  34.4%
12:05:07 : 05/07  22.7%
12:05:27 : 05/08  36.3%
12:06:05 : 05/09  50.0%
12:06:41 : 06/10  37.7%
12:07:30 : 07/11  27.4%
12:08:30 : 07/12  38.7%
12:09:26 : 07/13  50.0%
12:10:10 : 07/14  60.5%
12:11:58 : 07/15  69.6%
12:14:34 : 07/16  77.3%
12:15:34 : 08/17  68.5%
12:15:55 : 09/18  59.3%
12:16:26 : 09/19  67.6%
12:17:28 : 10/20  58.8%
12:18:39 : 10/21  66.8%
12:19:45 : 11/22  58.4%
12:20:52 : 12/23  50.0%
12:22:11 : 12/24  58.1%
12:23:18 : 13/25  50.0%
12:23:51 : 14/26  42.3%
12:24:26 : 14/27  50.0%
12:26:06 : 15/28  42.5%
12:27:09 : 16/29  35.6%
12:28:23 : 17/30  29.2%
12:29:29 : 18/31  23.7%
12:30:44 : 19/32  18.9%
12:31:23 : 20/33  14.8%
12:32:25 : 20/34  19.6%
12:34:35 : 21/35  15.5%
12:35:18 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 21/35 (15.5%)

post #12 of 107

Listened with both the EQ on and off. Again, A is Lossy and B is Lossless for the same reasons. The bass and kickdrum is heavier on B at the beginning.

 

After that, I admit they are very similar and can't really tell them apart. As I've seen with some personal comparison, I think compression hurts the bass.

 

PS: Listened again and while I think the bass is heavier on B, the left-ear cymbals seem louder on A. basshead.gif

 

They are very similar and both enjoyable to listen to.

post #13 of 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deverica Wolf View Post

Listened with both the EQ on and off. Again, A is Lossy and B is Lossless for the same reasons. The bass and kickdrum is heavier on B at the beginning.

 

After that, I admit they are very similar and can't really tell them apart. As I've seen with some personal comparison, I think compression hurts the bass.

 

PS: Listened again and while I think the bass is heavier on B, the left-ear cymbals seem louder on A. basshead.gif

 

They are very similar and both enjoyable to listen to.


ABX logs?

 

post #14 of 107

No, Winamp. I should try that ABX thingamajig. smile.gif

post #15 of 107

...argh, bad exercise before sleep ==

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.11
2012/02/10 04:56:52

File A: D:\A.wav
File B: D:\B.wav

04:56:52 : Test started.
04:57:06 : 00/01  100.0%
04:57:17 : 01/02  75.0%
04:57:28 : 01/03  87.5%
04:57:44 : 02/04  68.8%
04:57:54 : 03/05  50.0%
04:58:05 : 04/06  34.4%
04:58:17 : 04/07  50.0%
04:58:29 : 04/08  63.7%
04:58:41 : 04/09  74.6%
04:58:54 : 04/10  82.8%
04:59:06 : 04/11  88.7%
04:59:11 : Trial reset.
04:59:21 : 00/01  100.0%
04:59:30 : 01/02  75.0%
04:59:37 : 02/03  50.0%
04:59:43 : 03/04  31.3%
04:59:50 : 04/05  18.8%
05:00:13 : 04/06  34.4%
05:00:19 : 04/07  50.0%
05:00:31 : 05/08  36.3%
05:00:48 : 05/09  50.0%
05:01:00 : Trial reset.
05:01:07 : 01/01  50.0%
05:01:13 : 02/02  25.0%
05:01:19 : 03/03  12.5%
05:01:26 : 04/04  6.3%
05:01:42 : 05/05  3.1%
05:02:08 : 06/06  1.6%
05:02:27 : 07/07  0.8%
05:02:50 : 08/08  0.4%
05:03:14 : 09/09  0.2%
05:04:05 : 10/10  0.1%
05:04:16 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 19/30 (10.0%)

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › BLIND TEST: Lossless vs. MP3 320