STOP TELLING PEOPLE YOU CAN'T TELL 192AAC VS LOSSLESS ILL PROVE IT
Feb 15, 2007 at 4:46 AM Post #271 of 463
Just wanted to clear one thing up. I was told this on another post!
Quote:

Originally Posted by cooperpwc /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I so strongly disagreed with you on quitting this hobby unless one can win an ABX contest that I didn't even bother posting.


My response is:
I think you mis interpreted the ABX thread. I was not saying you have to win the test to stay in the hobby. NOT AT ALL!

If you listen to 128AAC,192AAC MP3's and think it sounds great then thats even better for you. saves you space! Why waste it if you cant hear it!

What I should have said was "Stop telling me that there is no difference between 192AAC and Lossless". This goes back to several threads were I was told that there is NO WAY I would be able to tell the difference between 192AAC and Lossless given an ABX Test. I proved them very wrong. (This was for me and me only).

I did not mean to imply in anyway if you couldnt past the test then give up the hobby and apologize if it came off that way!

I will add this Conversation to the thread just to clear that up.
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 5:03 AM Post #272 of 463
Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif
http://www.pcabx.com/


Interesting. The Mac verson there won't work on modern Macs but it might be possible to get the Unix one to work. I'll see what I can do.

Edit: No luck, none of these will work on any recent Mac. Hopefully something else is out there.
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 5:03 AM Post #273 of 463
Cool. I have no problem with other people having super ears. With my current setup, Foobar, Total Bithead and D77s, i can't hear the difference between FLAC and Lame V2 new-vbr. I've tried; I just can't. That may change when I get my DT880s and of course I'm starting to drool over expensive amps... Anyway I rip now to FLAC images before converting to Lame V2 and archive those to DVD so I'm open to the possibility that my ears will improve.
wink.gif
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 6:59 AM Post #274 of 463
trose49,

There are certain things that can be changed within a sound file, that no human can ever detect. A high end microphone can essentially hear everything, and record it. What does this mean? It means sounds that are very quiet, even near silent, are picked up by the microphone just as equally as the extremely loud sounds. If you place a microphone in a concert, it will record all sounds within it's frequency range, and organize them together accordingly. Imagine this---you are at a rock concert, the sound levels are loud enough to almost hurt---a person 10-15 rows away sneezes. Will you hear it? The microphone will, and it will be recorded as background information in the track. A lossy compression format will remove this sound from the signal, since it will determine it is essentially impossible for you to hear it, so it can save space by removing it. You can say, "BUT I WANT EVERYTHING KEPT!". I agree with this mindset, which is why I use FLAC. But to say, "I can hear that man sneeze with the FLAC, and I can't hear it with the AAC", is just plain wrong, since 99.9999999% of the time, you WILL NOT hear that sound, whether you use lossless or not. Follow?

Now to address a few things regarding your belief of "always being able to pick them out".

This is actually very common. That is, people claiming they can hear a difference on an iPod or other portable-player-based setup, but fail when the source is their PC. Ipods (and other portable players) have different decoding filters for different file types. It is not only possible, but commonplace, to hear a difference between, say, a WAV file and a 256kbps AAC file simply because they are decoded differently on the portable player. One may sound a fraction of a decibel louder (or lower) as a result of this. Equalizers are also applied differently, so if you use any EQ settings for playback, those DSP effects will be different for different formats. This can cause lossless and a lossy format to sound different from the iPods decoding or filtering alone, so I have no doubt that it is possible for you to hear some difference on this platform----I have done it myself.

Having said that, if you are set on not using the PC, the test can still easily be done.

First, you need to rip a handful of tracks (using EAC, Secure Mode) to WAV. Archive the uncompressed WAV's somewhere. After ripping them to WAV, compress the WAVs to 256 or 192kbps AAC files. Then, using Foobar2000, decode the AAC files back to WAVs. You should now have 2 wavs for each track---one which is truly lossless, and another which is lossy. Put them into 2 different folders, "AlbumName-Lossless" and "AlbumName-AAC", then put both of these folders on the iPod.

Once this is done, you need someone else to select the tracks for you. You should have your backs turned to each other, so they cannot in any way influence you. You select which song from the album you wish to attempt to ABX. They will play that song at random from 1 of the folders, not telling you which one. They play one, you guess which it was. They do NOT tell you if you were correct or incorrect, they merely write down whether you were right or not. Do this multiple times. Guessing once does not count---you have a 50-50 chance. So you need to guess correctly several times in a row--at least 12-16 minimum. If you can do this with the test setup exactly as I described, then it could be declared that you do genuinely hear a difference.

I have always been happy to organize such tests for people who claim to have "Golden Ears". Remember---if you can truly hear the difference, no one can fool you, and you will always know which is which, so you should feel perfectly comfortable letting someone else organize and run the test. If you can hear the difference, you are in control no matter what. But it is very important that someone else be in control of administering the test, in order to keep results relevant. If you used an ABX program on your PC, this need is met, since the program is in control of the test and randomly selecting tracks. Using your iPod setup however, you will need another person to assist. A person who understands how the test needs to be done, and gives it to you accordingly.
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 1:32 PM Post #275 of 463
Quote:

Originally Posted by SeagramSeven /img/forum/go_quote.gif
trose49,

There are certain things that can be changed within a sound file, that no human can ever detect. A high end microphone can essentially hear everything, and record it. What does this mean? It means sounds that are very quiet, even near silent, are picked up by the microphone just as equally as the extremely loud sounds. If you place a microphone in a concert, it will record all sounds within it's frequency range, and organize them together accordingly. Imagine this---you are at a rock concert, the sound levels are loud enough to almost hurt---a person 10-15 rows away sneezes. Will you hear it? The microphone will, and it will be recorded as background information in the track. A lossy compression format will remove this sound from the signal, since it will determine it is essentially impossible for you to hear it, so it can save space by removing it. You can say, "BUT I WANT EVERYTHING KEPT!". I agree with this mindset, which is why I use FLAC. But to say, "I can hear that man sneeze with the FLAC, and I can't hear it with the AAC", is just plain wrong, since 99.9999999% of the time, you WILL NOT hear that sound, whether you use lossless or not. Follow?

Now to address a few things regarding your belief of "always being able to pick them out".

This is actually very common. That is, people claiming they can hear a difference on an iPod or other portable-player-based setup, but fail when the source is their PC. Ipods (and other portable players) have different decoding filters for different file types. It is not only possible, but commonplace, to hear a difference between, say, a WAV file and a 256kbps AAC file simply because they are decoded differently on the portable player. One may sound a fraction of a decibel louder (or lower) as a result of this. Equalizers are also applied differently, so if you use any EQ settings for playback, those DSP effects will be different for different formats. This can cause lossless and a lossy format to sound different from the iPods decoding or filtering alone, so I have no doubt that it is possible for you to hear some difference on this platform----I have done it myself.

Having said that, if you are set on not using the PC, the test can still easily be done.

First, you need to rip a handful of tracks (using EAC, Secure Mode) to WAV. Archive the uncompressed WAV's somewhere. After ripping them to WAV, compress the WAVs to 256 or 192kbps AAC files. Then, using Foobar2000, decode the AAC files back to WAVs. You should now have 2 wavs for each track---one which is truly lossless, and another which is lossy. Put them into 2 different folders, "AlbumName-Lossless" and "AlbumName-AAC", then put both of these folders on the iPod.

Once this is done, you need someone else to select the tracks for you. You should have your backs turned to each other, so they cannot in any way influence you. You select which song from the album you wish to attempt to ABX. They will play that song at random from 1 of the folders, not telling you which one. They play one, you guess which it was. They do NOT tell you if you were correct or incorrect, they merely write down whether you were right or not. Do this multiple times. Guessing once does not count---you have a 50-50 chance. So you need to guess correctly several times in a row--at least 12-16 minimum. If you can do this with the test setup exactly as I described, then it could be declared that you do genuinely hear a difference.

I have always been happy to organize such tests for people who claim to have "Golden Ears". Remember---if you can truly hear the difference, no one can fool you, and you will always know which is which, so you should feel perfectly comfortable letting someone else organize and run the test. If you can hear the difference, you are in control no matter what. But it is very important that someone else be in control of administering the test, in order to keep results relevant. If you used an ABX program on your PC, this need is met, since the program is in control of the test and randomly selecting tracks. Using your iPod setup however, you will need another person to assist. A person who understands how the test needs to be done, and gives it to you accordingly.



DID YOU READ ANY OF THIS THREAD!

We have done the test! I used my PC just to see If I could still Identify the file. I could 14/16. Please read the whole thread before reitterating the entire premise it's based on!
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 2:00 PM Post #278 of 463
I don't know how people managed to get over 70% when even hardcore audiophiles don't get results that high, so congrats i guess
For me, all i can say is that it's possible that they might sound different, but i seriously can't tell most of the time even though i've got a solid musical backround


But the thread title just pisses me off.. all it shows is pure snobbery

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]


PS. 14/16 is less than 10/10
I demand pictures of you eating our UE10s
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 2:21 PM Post #280 of 463
Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Here is another pair of clips from a different place in the same song:

clip 2a
clip 2b

Click here to download Foobar:

http://www.foobar2000.org/foobar2000_0.9.4.2.exe

When you run the installer, be sure to select all of the available packages. Then just drag the two files into Foobar's main window and right click to do the ABX test as I previously instructed.



Some of us don't run windows. Could you mention which clip is encoded at what bitrate? I'm doing what you kinda suggested not doing, and that's guessing which one is which after listening to it through VLC. To play it in windows would require me to use parallels to play sound through that, and that's really skippy at times. I use windows as little as possible.

Thanks.
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 2:27 PM Post #281 of 463
Quote:

Originally Posted by jdimitri /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I don't know how people managed to get over 70% when even hardcore audiophiles don't get results that high, so congrats i guess
For me, all i can say is that it's possible that they might sound different, but i seriously can't tell most of the time even though i've got a solid musical backround


But the thread title just pisses me off.. all it shows is pure snobbery



PS. 14/16 is less than 10/10
I demand pictures of you eating our UE10s



First Off it was not even with my rig!(for which the challenge was intended) But 14/16 out of a office pc headphone jack is 10/10 to me. I will post results using my rig. If someone could help me figure out how to do it.

It just shows peoples ears are different! Thats all!

I will Change the title if that is bothering ya!
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 3:01 PM Post #282 of 463
Well I don't use aac but I can tell the difference between flac losless and a mp3 at 320kbps...

So I think I have to agree with him. However the cd you ripped from is quite important too. Lately I've been buying some cd's to get the extra quality compared to mp3 but when I listened to them some were crap...

But the reason why was explained in the thread about the "loudness war", cranking up the lower volume parts in a song, which creates some nasty distortion :x
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 3:23 PM Post #283 of 463
I see a bunch of folks 'bragging' about how well they did in ABXing here, so let me be the first to brag about how badly I did: 10/16 on clip 3, 5/16 on clip 1...didn't try clip 2 because it was pretty obvious how things were going.

Granted, I was listening to the clips out of my pretty average-sounding notebook soundcard, and if there were a ABX utility for my X5, I might be able to tell the difference out of my E500s. But if it's *this* close, who cares? I get the impression that the OP here has 50, maybe 100 albums (correct me if I'm wrong). With a relatively small music collection, of course it makes sense to rip lossless for your portable source. Even with the 30GB ipod, you can fit close to 100 albums on it lossless.

My music collection is close to 1000 albums...the single greatest appeal to me of digital & portable music is that, for the first time since I was 12, I can actually have *all* of my music with me at once. I can go cross-country for a week and not spend 3 hours trying to anticipate what CDs I'm going to want to listen to. I can go to Europe for a couple months and take *everything* with me. Amazing. A tiny difference in cymbal resolution or the tightness of a bassline is so unbelievably insignificant compared to that utility that I feel you'd have to be crazy to rip lossless for your DAP if you're in my situation.

Also, let's just take a moment to realize how good lossy files sound these days. Even if you can tell the difference (as I'm quite sure that some folks can), those AAC samples sound pretty damn good.

Different strokes for different folks -- if you love lossless, have a great rig, and don't have a ton of music, by all means, lossless is the way to go. But don't assume that lossy "sucks" just because there are some folks around here who say it's so. Consider your needs, do a couple ABX tests for yourself, and make up your own mind.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 3:28 PM Post #284 of 463
I did so/so on the test as well...but at the same time much of it came down to guesswork, not necessarily hearing a solid difference, I'm sure that applies to many of the results-posters. The final solution: Rip CD's to your harddrive in lossless, then convert to lossy (pref 192/224 kbps+, thats about where I stop hearing a difference) for your DAP. Good balance of SQ and use of storage capacity.
 
Feb 15, 2007 at 3:43 PM Post #285 of 463
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffreybar /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My music collection is close to 1000 albums...the single greatest appeal to me of digital & portable music is that, for the first time since I was 12, I can actually have *all* of my music with me at once. I can go cross-country for a week and not spend 3 hours trying to anticipate what CDs I'm going to want to listen to. I can go to Europe for a couple months and take *everything* with me. Amazing. A tiny difference in cymbal resolution or the tightness of a bassline is so unbelievably insignificant compared to that utility that I feel you'd have to be crazy to rip lossless for your DAP if you're in my situation.

Also, let's just take a moment to realize how good lossy files sound these days. Even if you can tell the difference (as I'm quite sure that some folks can), those AAC samples sound pretty damn good.

Different strokes for different folks -- if you love lossless, have a great rig, and don't have a ton of music, by all means, lossless is the way to go. But don't assume that lossy "sucks" just because there are some folks around here who say it's so. Consider your needs, do a couple ABX tests for yourself, and make up your own mind.
smily_headphones1.gif



That nails it... couldn't have said it better myself.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top