BLIND TEST: 128kbps mp3 vs Lossless
Feb 5, 2012 at 1:10 PM Post #31 of 180

Crazy*Carl

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Posts
852
Likes
28


Quote:
Imported both tracks in fb2k, scanned with replay gain, played both for ~10 secs. The cymbals etc. sounded less clearer and slightly clipped on A => mp3.
My abx test setup: some realtek onboard + px100. Yes, I'm serious.


 
Ya real tek is prolly 95% as good as a 1000$ DAC.  But it doesn't even touch my intel high def audio, which is 96% of a 1000$ DAC!
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 3:59 PM Post #32 of 180

xnor

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
4,092
Likes
222
Ya real tek is prolly 95% as good as a 1000$ DAC.  But it doesn't even touch my intel high def audio, which is 96% of a 1000$ DAC!


I'm using this setup because I've fared better with it or as good as many guys with expensive speaker setups, e.g. at listening tests @ HA.
Many would say that it'd be unfair to compare a good hp setup with a good speaker setup regarding ABX tests because headphones are less forgiving and distort less -> you can hear clipping/distortion/noise on the recording much more easily.

Also, usually I'm listening at fairly low volume levels with this setup so I couldn't care less for dynamic range, noise, linearity, etc. of the DAC/amp. :)

That's why I always use this setup for ABX tests, unless I fail the test. :wink: Btw, when I say I'm serious I mean it.
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 4:57 PM Post #35 of 180

RPGWiZaRD

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Posts
6,343
Likes
382
I use the lowest volume possible that grants me maximum listening pleasure so usually I use the exact same volume level that I've found providing me optimal enjoyment (then I also can keep track on my hearing doesn't get very noticable worse haha), I'd think it lies around 70~72dB or so when vocals and everything are aproximately as loud as a person speaking (loudly), haven't measured it precisely. At say 80dB which is where I'd concider things to become very loud I don't really get any more enjoyment compared to say 70dB, possibly the opposite if there's lots of harsh highs in the recordings. 
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 6:14 PM Post #36 of 180

xnor

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
4,092
Likes
222
I listen around 60-70dB or at least I try to.  Not really that loud.


Same here. Actually everyone who I asked to listen to ~60 dB SPL (roughly 5% in windows mixer) told me to "turn up the volume, can't hear anything!". So I guess it's actually silent for most people, when listening to music anyway.

Of course, occasionally when rocking out I do turn up the volume to 80+ dB SPL. \m/
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 6:37 PM Post #37 of 180

milosz

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
971
Likes
115
This is pretty interesting.
 
I'd like to see this sort of test/poll repeated for a few other criteria.
 
1.  I'd like to see if Head-Fi folk could hear the difference in a WAV file that was copied straight from a CD  vs. a file that went from WAV=>FLAC=>WAV.  (Absolute Sound recently published a series of articles that claimed there would be clearly audible differences, and in fact the unmolested WAV file would sound better, even though they were bit-identical...)
 
2. I'd like to see if Head-Fi folk could hear the difference between a 96 khz / 24 bit native 'hi rez' file and the same 96/24 file resampled to 44.1 /16 then upsampled back up to 96/24.  Audio Engineering Society papers indicate that people can't hear the difference between 96/24 and redbook.  I'd be curious to see if Head-Fi'ers corroborate this.
 
 
 
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 6:39 PM Post #38 of 180

xnor

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
4,092
Likes
222
1) There are better ways to waste time.

2) The problem is that you don't know if the person voting for "I can hear the difference" is cheating or honest.
Maybe we should use the same tool (ABC/HR) that is used with listening tests @ HA.
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 7:23 PM Post #39 of 180

El_Doug

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Posts
3,450
Likes
108
rofl what a load of crap
 
Quote:
This is pretty interesting.
 
I'd like to see this sort of test/poll repeated for a few other criteria.
 
1.  I'd like to see if Head-Fi folk could hear the difference in a WAV file that was copied straight from a CD  vs. a file that went from WAV=>FLAC=>WAV.  (Absolute Sound recently published a series of articles that claimed there would be clearly audible differences, and in fact the unmolested WAV file would sound better, even though they were bit-identical...)



 
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 7:41 PM Post #40 of 180

cdnaudiophile

New Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 3, 2011
Posts
41
Likes
10
Terrible test. It was easy to tell b was the "better" track but the recording is terrible.
 
Feb 5, 2012 at 8:16 PM Post #41 of 180

ohhgourami

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Posts
1,681
Likes
212


Quote:
rofl what a load of crap


LOL it will be a waste of time.  I can barely tell the difference between 320 vs flac through blind test.  WAV vs FLAC is straight up impossible which SHOULD be the case.  I already felt like I spoke too much.
 
 
Feb 6, 2012 at 10:15 AM Post #43 of 180

Mates1500

New Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Posts
3
Likes
0
Hey guys, I'm new here :)
Tested with Sennheiser PC161, and some Asus integrated sound card, but I'm fine with that
Even in the first few seconds, I can hear that B's bass is so much clearer, that it was not even worth listening to more of it
 
Feb 6, 2012 at 11:05 AM Post #45 of 180

Lenni

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Posts
2,585
Likes
1,052
Location
6 Music
it would be interesting if the test could be done somehow without having the files open to an audio editor. then I'd like to see how many of those "oh was so easy..." would guess it right. 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top