[trose49]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif Anyone willing to put up a test-file with 256VBR + Lossless samples mixed up? This really needs to be done.

Whos putting up the prize!!!

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif And Im very sure none of you can hear difference between 256VBR vs. Lossless.

In my experience that will depend on the song that is being encoded, I definitely do not believe that is true as a blanket statement for all music.

 

[recstar24]

Normally, I wouldn't say anything, but your post is pretty asinine, IMO. Just because someone can't hear a difference between various encoding rates doesn't mean they are any less a headfier than you or me. I hope your kidding about people actually leaving, because that would be a shame. If a listener is able to get the same amount of musical enjoyment from his 192 kb mp3's as i get from my rig, more power to that listener, it's all about enjoying music, I hope you can understand that at some point in time.

 

[MaZa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trose49 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Whos putting up the prize!!!

Who has something he doesnt need which he can give to the winner?

Quote:

In my experience that will depend on the song that is being encoded, I definitely do not believe that is true as a blanket statement for all music.

Point taken. In simple music its definetly an impossibility to hear difference. But in complex music which is either highly dynamic or intense it might be possibility, but then again due to intensity of such music the artifacts might be drowned out too, making them very hard to notice.

 

[Spaceage]

Todd, decaf, seriously.

Yes, lossless is technically better, but to say that 192aac isn't even close is silly. Maybe you can tell the difference, but "not even close"? That's the kind of statement that misleads the noobs.

If I have learned anything it's that subtleties are a very big part of this "hobby". That's what the noobs need to realize. When they read a post about a particular portable amp making a "huge difference" they are going to expect just that when they get it. Many are going to be disappointed because they didn't have realistic expectations.

While I don't think lossless is a very big leap from 192, I plan on making the jump as soon as Sony supports lossless on their devices. I probably won't be able to tell the difference, but at least I won't have to second-guess my rip rate anymore (and I can get back to listening to the damn music.)

 

[trose49]

Quote:

Originally Posted by recstar24 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Normally, I wouldn't say anything, but your post is pretty asinine, IMO. Just because someone can't hear a difference between various encoding rates doesn't mean they are any less a headfier than you or me. I hope your kidding about people actually leaving, because that would be a shame. If a listener is able to get the same amount of musical enjoyment from his 192 kb mp3's as i get from my rig, more power to that listener, it's all about enjoying music, I hope you can understand that at some point in time.

NO I am not saying that!!!! If you love your rig with 192AAC then God bless ya keep on listening.

However dont post that I am wasting space and that there is no way that you can tell a difference between 192AAC and Lossless. If you feel that there is no difference then I say this Hobby might not be for you. After all like Eric Johnson says "Its all about Tone" or maybe that was Billy Gibbons.

I dont even care if some says that they cant tell the difference just dont tell me that there IS NO DIFFERENCE!

 

[cotdt]

yes, high bitrate AAC and MP3 sounds superior to lossless. more organic, analogue sounding and more natural.

 

[trose49]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaceage /img/forum/go_quote.gif Todd, decaf, seriously. Yes, lossless is technically better, but to say that 192aac isn't even close is silly. Maybe you can tell the difference, but "not even close"? That's the kind of statement that misleads the noobs. If I have learned anything it's that subtleties are a very big part of this "hobby". That's what the noobs need to realize. When they read a post about a particular portable amp making a "huge difference" they are going to expect just that when they get it. Many are going to be disappointed because they didn't have realistic expectations. While I don't think lossless is a very big leap from 192, I plan on making the jump as soon as Sony supports lossless on their devices. I probably won't be able to tell the difference, but at least I won't have to second-guess my rip rate anymore (and I can get back to listening to the damn music.)

I know Im a bit razzed up. But no lie NO EVEN CLOSE is being as tame as I can get. I could not listen to the 192AAC files even though it was the album I wanted to hear.

I will add that I could not tell a difference with my super.fi 5 pros!

So maybe the large majority of iem owners can not tell.

The UE-10's make it painfully obvious. I dont have to listen for the difference in any way it like listening to an album with a dirty needle. YES Im serious.

Maybe I should requote. Dont use 192AAC with UE-10 Pros


Hows thats!!!!

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trose49 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I will Accept any challange of the same 10 songs in both formats with my UE-10's and if I dont get em all right I will eat my UE-10's. [size=xx-small](gotta be something in it for me of course)[/size]

OK, I don't know what you mean by "challange of the same 10 songs," so here is my proposed challenge to you:

We mutually agree on three songs, in different genres. Since I will be preparing clips, these must be songs that I have available in my CD collection. I will then prepare clips of the three songs as follows:

1. Make 30 second clips of each of those three songs. (For copyright reasons, I do not wish to distribute entire songs.)
2. Encode the 30 second clips to 192kbps AAC.
3. Transcode the original .wav clip and the 192kbps AAC clip to FLAC.
4. Make the three pairs of clips available for download.

You will then:

1. Download the three pairs of clips.
2. For each pair of clips, conduct an ABX test in Foobar or an equivalent ABX program, using 16 trials for each test. You will turn OFF the option to display results as you go, so that you do not know until the end of the test how many you got right.
3. Post the results of your ABX tests in this thread.

If you are able to successfully ABX all three pairs, I will change my signature to say "How Trose49 taught me the truth about lossless and showed me that I am deaf," with a hyperlink to this thread. If you are unable to successfully ABX any of the three pairs, you will change your signature to "How Febs taught me the truth about lossless and showed me that it was all my imagination," with a hyperlink to this thread. If you are able to successfully ABX some, but not all, of the three pairs of clips, then we both will change our signatures to say "How I was wrong about lossless versus lossy," with a link to this thread.

Note: by "successful ABX," I mean that the results of the ABX test indicate that there is less than a 5% chance that you are guessing.

What do you think?

 

[Spaceage]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trose49 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I will add that I could not tell a difference with my super.fi 5 pros! So maybe the large majority of iem owners can not tell. The UE-10's make it painfully obvious. I dont have to listen for the difference in any way it like listening to an album with a dirty needle. YES Im serious. Maybe I should requote. Dont use 192AAC with UE-10 Pros Hows thats!!!!

Ok, I'm with you now. If I had the UE-10's I would get a new DAP and rip at lossless, no doubt.

 

[stewgriff]

Ah, a little more rational. Come on, lossy's really gone a long way since the Napster days...

For the record, I use LAME 3.97 at V0 (215-245 bps), and it's well nigh transparent on my DT990. Although, granted, I don't have a good amp yet.

 

[MaZa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif OK, I don't know what you mean by "challange of the same 10 songs," so here is my proposed challenge to you: We mutually agree on three songs, in different genres. Since I will be preparing clips, these must be songs that I have available in my CD collection. I will then prepare clips of the three songs as follows: Make 30 second clips of each of those three songs. (For copyright reasons, I do not wish to distribute entire songs.) Encode the 30 second clips to 192kbps AAC. Transcode the original .wav clip and the 192kbps AAC clip to FLAC. Make the three pairs of clips available for download. You will then: Download the three pairs of clips. For each pair of clips, conduct an ABX test in Foobar or an equivalent ABX program, using 16 trials for each test. You will turn OFF the option to display results as you go, so that you do not know until the end of the test how many you got right. Post the results of your ABX tests in this thread. If you are able to successfully ABX all three pairs, I will change my signature to say "How Trose49 taught me the truth about lossless and showed me that I am deaf," with a hyperlink to this thread. If you are unable to successfully ABX any of the three pairs, you will change your signature to "How Febs taught me the truth about lossless and showed me that it was all my imagination," with a hyperlink to this thread. If you are able to successfully ABX some, but not all, of the three pairs of clips, then we both will change our signatures to say "How I was wrong about lossless versus lossy," with a link to this thread. Note: by "successful ABX," I mean that the results of the ABX test indicate that there is less than a 5% chance that you are guessing. What do you think?

I think there should be 6 songs, or 2 different parts from those three songs. This is to minimise the luckyshots.

But then again, "rules" should be more mellow if more clips are added. Getting them all right, no matter how good ear, might be bit too difficult.

 

[Benco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif What do you think?

I can't wait for this! ABX dueling!

 

[feh1325]

i can't tell a difference between my tracks ripped around 256 and lossless

i don't think that having inferior files should dictate if you should give up this hobby. its like saying you should quit playing violin if you don't have a stradivarius.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif Getting them all right, no matter how good ear, might be bit too difficult.

Well, don't forget that the assertion that we are testing is this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by trose49 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let me tell you. You dont need and a/b, abx, qzk, wkk, xyz test to tell that lossless blows the 192aac stuff away!!! [size=medium]NOT EVEN CLOSE!!![/size]

Given that assertion, I think that it is appropriate that the challenge be difficult.