[wgr73]

What would you guys choose?

 

[hardnrg]

Ears 2.0 ?

seriously though, erm WinABX... I take it you are using a Windows PC?

 

[krmathis]

I choose ABC/HR-Java
Not because its great (it actually sucks big time), but because its the best/only ABX application for Mac OS X.

 

[wgr73]

Windows xp, yeah.

 

[EnOYiN]

Foobar?

 

[Ahriman4891]

Foobar ABX plugin seems the most convenient.

 

[wgr73]

Lol are you serious? I have foobar! Man, ok so foobar can rip, encode, ABX, and what else? It looks way too simple for all of the stuff I'm finding out it does! How do you run the ABX test with foobar?

 

[wgr73]

Lol, you just beat me to it...by seconds. Where do you get that

 

[Drewpy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wgr73 /img/forum/go_quote.gif How do you run the ABX test with foobar?

I believe that the ABX component is included with the regular Foobar2000 distribution. Select two tracks (Ctrl + left click), right click on one of them, and under "Utils" select the "ABX Two Tracks..." option.

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drewpy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I believe that the ABX component is included with the regular Foobar2000 distribution.

Indeed. During installation, you have to make sure to run a complete (full) installation, though.

 

[appletree]

So I tried the one in foobar and the results are really astonishing:
I couldn't observe any difference on Lame 3.97 encoded 96kbit (high) mp3 vs. wav :lol: My configuration was X-Fi -> HD 595. Do you think that I am deaf ? Or what does it mean when I do not hear any difference ? At least I was able to decide on 64kbit mp3 vs. wav, where the difference was quite obvious :lol: I was always in doubt if I can hear any difference in 128kbit MP3 vs CD audio, now I know it for sure.

 

[NightWoundsTime]

Quote:

Originally Posted by appletree /img/forum/go_quote.gif So I tried the one in foobar and the results are really astonishing: I couldn't observe any difference on Lame 3.97 encoded 96kbit (high) mp3 vs. wav :lol: My configuration was X-Fi -> HD 595. Do you think that I am deaf ? Or what does it mean when I do not hear any difference ? At least I was able to decide on 64kbit mp3 vs. wav, where the difference was quite obvious :lol: I was always in doubt if I can hear any difference in 128kbit MP3 vs CD audio, now I know it for sure.

Sometimes it comes down to knowing what to listen for. If you're blasting some multi-layered rock music than the MP3 is doing its job in masking the deficiencies. I have a test track for this stuff that I can hear up to 256 before the line blurs, and it consists of someone playing an arpeggio on a piano while someone else snaps or claps, or similar. It's on the Waking Life soundtrack which was recorded in a real space with lots of musicians around so the dirty details are all present. So I can hear the entire nature of the "snaps" change with most levels of MP3. Would I miss that tiny detail in regular listening *without* ABX? Umm, probably not. But the basic point is that most people won't hear a difference unless they find the right source material.

 

[wgr73]

Thanks guys!

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by appletree /img/forum/go_quote.gif So I tried the one in foobar and the results are really astonishing: I couldn't observe any difference on Lame 3.97 encoded 96kbit (high) mp3 vs. wav :lol: My configuration was X-Fi -> HD 595. Do you think that I am deaf ? Or what does it mean when I do not hear any difference ?

No, you're not deaf. You've just discovered that perceptual encoding schemes used in modern lossy codecs have gotten very very good. Now enjoy your music!

 

[fordgtlover]

Code:

[left]So I tried the one in foobar and the results are really astonishing: I couldn't observe any difference on Lame 3.97 encoded 96kbit (high) mp3 vs. wav[/left]

Congratulations on all the disc space you're about to save. It's about the only thing you'll get to save by visiting head-fi.