[cifani090]

I was right

The clip that correct (not giving it away) has a bit more power in the voice.

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

I was right

The clip that correct (not giving it away) has a bit more power in the voice.

Now try the test at mp3ornot.com
 
It's similar (128 vs 320) but the idea is to blind test 3 tracks multiple times, and then get a %.  15-20 times would give you something that is statistically significant.
 
This one is a lot harder than the original test from this thread, and just shows how far lossy compression has come in the last few years.  It seems to be more easily detected with gear higher up the chain (more revealing).  Interesting exercise anyway.

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

Now try the test at mp3ornot.com
It's similar (128 vs 320) but the idea is to blind test 3 tracks multiple times, and then get a %.  15-20 times would give you something that is statistically significant.
This one is a lot harder than the original test from this thread, and just shows how far lossy compression has come in the last few years.  It seems to be more easily detected with gear higher up the chain (more revealing).  Interesting exercise anyway.

Ya, thats definitely harder.
 

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

Ya, thats definitely harder.
 

What sort of % are you getting if you use your 535's (say over 15-20 tries)?  I found IEM's were a bit easier (SE425/B2) than my SRH840's.  Still haven't had a perfect score if I go over 15 cycles - best was 14/15 - which I guess is good enough.
 
Was quite significant that Deadlylover (a self proclaimed tin-ear - like me

) was able to go 100% with his Stax set-up (26/26).  Showed me that it's probably worth it for me to keep climbing a little further up the chain as I can afford it.  Interesting anyway.

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

Now try the test at mp3ornot.com
 
It's similar (128 vs 320) but the idea is to blind test 3 tracks multiple times, and then get a %.  15-20 times would give you something that is statistically significant.
 
This one is a lot harder than the original test from this thread, and just shows how far lossy compression has come in the last few years.  It seems to be more easily detected with gear higher up the chain (more revealing).  Interesting exercise anyway.

I chose correctly.
 
The immediate 'obvious' difference to me was that the 'z' of the 'cos' 320 kbps mp3 was slightly raspier than the 128 kbps version.
 
Hearing the difference between different bitrate mp3s may be be more immediate when comparing acoustic jazz mp3s instead of recordings with a distorted sound such as the ones in the above test.
 

 

[JamesMcProgger]

Quote:

Ya, thats definitely harder.
 

copy/paste score 

 

 

[JamesMcProgger]

i got 

but then the same tracks starting to repeat, idk if that makes it harder or easier.

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

copy/paste score 

 

I got the same as you, im currently unable to try my SE535 cause of some minor problems (louder on the right than the left, and i switched the cables and the same, getting a new cables, ill have to try that, i had been working out with them) but wouldn't i have to have a good DAC to use them

 

 

[Brooko]

Try a minimum of 15-20 cycles.  Should give a really good guide.  By trial and error (and doing it enough times), anyone can get a 4/4 - even by guessing.  Far harder to achieve 15/15 or 20/20.  And yes - it's supposed to repeat, and there are only 3 tracks.
 
Mine was
 

 
 

 

[Brooko]

 
Quote:

I chose correctly.  
The immediate 'obvious' difference to me was that the 'z' of the 'cos' 320 kbps mp3 was slightly raspier than the 128 kbps version.
 
Hearing the difference between different bitrate mp3s may be be more immediate when comparing acoustic jazz mp3s instead of recordings with a distorted sound such as the ones in the above test.
 

Try it again - using the actual link.  This is a different test that the one in the OP of this thread.  There are 3 songs which cycle repeatedly.  Try going 15 -20 times, then post your results.  Use the graphic from the site  Harder than you think.

 

[JamesMcProgger]

Quote:

Try a minimum of 15-20 cycles.  Should give a really good guide.  By trial and error (and doing it enough times), anyone can get a 4/4 - even by guessing.  Far harder to achieve 15/15 or 20/20.  And yes - it's supposed to repeat, and there are only 3 tracks.
 
Mine was
 

 
 

thats impressive! I went ahead from my previous and got to 6/13, and then decided to stop, for my own good.
 
what equipment where you using?
 

 

[Brooko]

 
Quote:

thats impressive! I went ahead from my previous and got to 6/13, and then decided to stop, for my own good.
 
what equipment where you using?
 

Not as impressive as Deadlylover's 25/25 with his Stax

 
I originally used PC > E7/E9 > SRH840, and was gettting consistently 70-75%
 
Then I switched to PC > E7/E9 > SE425, and that's when I got the 93%.  I did it twice (first was 87% 13/15), then the one I posted.  I found it really hard - and a real eye opener.
 
From there I tried Foobar ABX feature with 320mp3 vs FLAC (properly normalised / volume matched).  I couldn't tell the difference - pure guessing.  This is why I'm highly skeptical now about the golden ears who can "easily tell FLAC from 320 mp3".  I'm just a tin-ear, but I still can't see how anyone could do it reliably in a repetitive test.
 

 

[deadlylover]

Heh thanks.
 
One of these days I'll really need to do a serious balls to the wall ABX with 320 v FLAC, I just quit too easily because it seems too hopeless everytime I try.

 

[BobSaysHi]

I failed it.
 
16%
 
but I don't really care about subtle differences, for you see I am not an audiophile.

 

[kn19h7]

This was bloody hard and tiring.. I was actually going through this by B-B-B-X-choose, leaving A alone

 
..and for the distortion test I posted at front page, my result of recent try

 
 
 
ugh.. i always do stupid things during holiday orz