or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What equipment would I need to hear the difference between a 320kbps file and a losless file like FLAC?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What equipment would I need to hear the difference between a 320kbps file and a losless file like FLAC? - Page 3

post #31 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by adupree View Post
 

I have done blind tests. Had to for my degree :) 

 

What codec did you test?

post #32 of 100
Quote:
There is a section about equipment/price

 

Where exactly. I must have missed that.

 

Are you trying to suggest that the more money you spend on equipment the easier it is to distinguish Mp3 vs Wav?

post #33 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

What codec did you test?

It was a WAV file @44.1kHz/16bit and MP3 @44.1kHz/320kbit. Both were bounced out of Pro-Tools directly. They were then checked for level matching with an SPL meter.

post #34 of 100

Frauenhofer or LAME? I can usually hear the difference with 320 Frauenhofer, but not LAME. And AAC is even better. AAC 256 VBR is completely transparent.

 

It was a few years back, but the ProTools workstation I had did Frauenhofer. The MP3s weren't very good straight out of ProTools.


Edited by bigshot - 1/17/14 at 4:44pm
post #35 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

Frauenhofer or LAME? I can usually hear the difference with 320 Frauenhofer, but not LAME. And AAC is even better. AAC 256 VBR is completely transparent.

 

It was a few years back, but the ProTools workstation I had did Frauenhofer. The MP3s weren't very good straight out of ProTools. 

It was Pro Tools 10. Pro Tools uses Frauenhofer algorithms, not LAME. Because there are not standards to the way MP3 encoding is done, each algorithm basically gets to choose which info is the least psycho acoustically important. Some people prefer one over the other. I've heard both done to the same original WAV/AIFF file and both sound good, but not the same as the original source.

post #36 of 100

Can you prove that?

post #37 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonaldDumsfeld View Post
 

Can you prove that?

Prove what?

post #38 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by adupree View Post
 

It was Pro Tools 10. Pro Tools uses Frauenhofer algorithms, not LAME.

 

The Frauenhofer codec is a decade old now. Compression technology has gotten a LOT better since. I bet if you did the same with an AAC 320 file, you wouldn't get the same results at all.

post #39 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

The Frauenhofer codec is a decade old now. Compression technology has gotten a LOT better since. I bet if you did the same with an AAC 320 file, you wouldn't get the same results at all.

I'll test that. Give me a few minutes.

post #40 of 100

Let me know what you find out. I did the test with AIFF vs Frauenhofer, LAME and AAC, and I could detect a difference all the way up to 320. The difference at LAME 320 was very very slight. But with AAC, it was imperceptible. AAC is MP4, not MP3.

post #41 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

Let me know what you find out. I did the test with AIFF vs Frauenhofer, LAME and AAC, and I could detect a difference all the way up to 320. The difference at LAME 320 was very very slight. But with AAC, it was imperceptible. AAC is MP4, not MP3.

Just curious, what level are you listening to and what gear? I'm go do it 83-85dB on a B&W 802D system with Bryston amps, and a set of headphones(not sure which).


Edited by adupree - 1/17/14 at 7:16pm
post #42 of 100

Custom 12 inch studio monitors, JBL towers, Sunfire sub. Sennheiser HD590 and a headphone I can't talk about because I signed a NDA.

 

My whole media server is driven off of AAC 256 VBR. I have a year and a half's worth of music streaming through my house on random play 24/7.


Edited by bigshot - 1/17/14 at 7:52pm
post #43 of 100

Just did it, and had my wife listen to it also. I did a WAV, MP3, and AAC. I setup a Logic session with each of the songs and gave each a number and had the Mrs. pick a song and solo it. After listening to each for a minute I told her which was what. The MP3 was obvious. The AAC was not as bad by any mean, but I was still able to tell what was the WAV. I then did the same with her listening. She was able to pick out the MP3, but not the other two. After this I also inverted the MP3, AAC, and a copy of the WAV and played them against the original WAV. The WAVs played on top of each other cancelled completely. The MP3 cancelled a good amount, and the AAC cancelled most of it. 

 

It definitely is possible to hear the difference, but it does depend on the equipment(to an extent) and each persons hearing.

post #44 of 100

The codec is the biggest factor.

 

Was your own test blind like your wife's?

 

The cancelled out file- how low a dB was left with AAC?


Edited by bigshot - 1/17/14 at 8:34pm
post #45 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

The codec is the biggest factor.

 

Was your own test blind like your wife's?

 

The cancelled out file- how low a dB was left with AAC?

Yes, mine was as well I went and sat in front of the comp so I couldn't see the song she picked. 

 

WAV: RMS -10dBFS

 

MP3: RMS -30.7dBFS 

 

AAC: RMS -40dBFS

 

So there was a good drop. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What equipment would I need to hear the difference between a 320kbps file and a losless file like FLAC?