Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 320 kbps MP3 vs. normal audio CD listening Sound quality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

320 kbps MP3 vs. normal audio CD listening Sound quality - Page 8

post #106 of 516

Is there a similar test done on here with 128kbps vorbis or 160kbps MP3?

post #107 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

A Double Blind Test is calling for you - FooBar has a built-in ABX. A minimum of 15 trials is suggested.
Piece of cake Nick. I use JRiver. WASAPI event style. Yeah, 24 bit native sounds better than 256k AAC.
Don't be shocked.
post #108 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvandyk View Post


Piece of cake Nick. I use JRiver. WASAPI event style. Yeah, 24 bit native sounds better than 256k AAC.
Don't be shocked.

Did you re-convert the 24 bit to AAC or just use the itunes version for the test?

 

And can you post the results if that's the case? I'd be quite impressed if you got 15/15.


Edited by chewy4 - 11/1/12 at 10:42am
post #109 of 516

How loud did you have to get to hear the difference between 24 bit and 16?

post #110 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvandyk View Post


Piece of cake Nick. I use JRiver. WASAPI event style. Yeah, 24 bit native sounds better than 256k AAC.
Don't be shocked.

 

I teach undergraduates, I'm seldom shocked anymore. Can you post a couple of 20 second segments of the files you compared, I'll run them through Cool Edit pro and see where the differences are.

Thanks in advance.

post #111 of 516

I have Sunken Condos ripped as ALAC if you need any samples of that to compare as well.

beerchug.gif

post #112 of 516
Thread Starter 

Yes please and then do a comparison screenshot in here, that'll be awesome :-)

post #113 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by stv014 View Post

Also, try converting the 24 bit version to high bitrate MP3, Vorbis, or AAC yourself using a good encoder. It could easily be the case that the iTunes version has more "loudness war" dynamic compression and clipping, and sounds worse mainly because of that, rather than the format.


I think AAC has a better noise floor than Mp3 based on an old test you can find online. AAC exacts a lot of its memory savings from the high frequency range, which I find interesting.

 

Has anyone looked at the impact of LAME 3.9x on music rips? I have been wondering how much better that codec might be now. All my rips sound pretty awesome.

post #114 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollDragon View Post

I have Sunken Condos ripped as ALAC if you need any samples of that to compare as well.

beerchug.gif

Did you RIP it from the 16 bit CD? I have the 24 bit files. I did convert them to 24 bit ALAC for library purposes in itunes.

 

FLAC files get played back in JRiver though, uncompressed to WAV with Traders Little Helper.

 

Getting back to the question on the 256k itunes version, I can't explain why it sounds like crap. Ask itunes.

post #115 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvandyk View Post

Did you RIP it from the 16 bit CD? I have the 24 bit files. I did convert them to 24 bit ALAC for library purposes in itunes.

 

 

Just the 16's here off of the CD.

 

"Traders Little Helper" I'll have to pull that down tonight looks very useful.

beerchug.gif


Edited by TrollDragon - 11/2/12 at 9:43am
post #116 of 516
The CD is very likely a different mastering than your 24 bit files.
post #117 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

The CD is very likely a different mastering than your 24 bit files.

The master tapes were done in 24 bit. I'm sure the 16 bit CD also sounds nice. It's a good album too, if you are a Steely Dan fan.

post #118 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollDragon View Post

 

Just the 16's here off of the CD.

 

"Traders Little Helper" I'll have to pull that down tonight looks very useful.

beerchug.gif

TLC is a handy free program. For those that need to get their FLAC's turned into ALAC, it still requires 3 steps. TLC convert FLAC's to wave, import WAV's into itunes..then create ALACs. Will retain all resolution doing this. Sometimes, I wonder if the full bitrate WAV's sound better than the FLAC or ALAC's. Being in "Sound Science", I'm sure it's not possible!

post #119 of 516

I like dbpoweramp for converting because it actually takes advantage of multi-processing to its fullest. It's extremely fast.

 

And you are correct on that not being possible. If it sounded better that means there were errors in compression/decompression.

post #120 of 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvandyk View Post

The master tapes were done in 24 bit. I'm sure the 16 bit CD also sounds nice. It's a good album too, if you are a Steely Dan fan.

There's no surprise that you can hear a difference between 24 bit and 16 bit if the mastering is different. When I was comparing SACD to redbook, I had a very difficult time finding a disk with the same mastering on both layers.

If you want to do a comparison test, you need to control the variables so you're hearing what you're testing for, not something completely different.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 320 kbps MP3 vs. normal audio CD listening Sound quality