WAV compared to MP3 - by popular demand

Yes, if 6 think its track 1 and 6 think its track 2, does that mean only half the people are 'good enough' to tell, or does it mean that people are basically just guessing?

 

I have a firm preference for my selection and will be more than a little surprised if I've not identified the two formats correctly. In some of these tests in the past I've not been confident at all so haven't participated, but this one I hear a pretty obvious difference. Will be interesting to see if I'm right!

Tony.

 

Only one more vote required..... come on Brian find that adaptor

I think we'll close the poll at 20 but keep the thread going with some further samples - different music and bit rates. We can then develop the discussion.

 

Bollocks, I prefer 2 and you prefer 1.................

 

I reckon the results so far mean that no one can tell the difference even if they think they can

This test is designed to test the tracks performance.

It would be a differently designed test to check whether any individual listener could tell wav from mp3.

You might need 6 different tracks with two versions of each track all in random order, so as to give 12 choices for the listener to identify the mp3's. Then he could compare his score with the master list.

JC.

 

p.s. actually five songs with two versions of each song, all jumbled up in a playlist, so as to give ten choices, would easily produce a score out of ten, or a percentage of correct evaluation by each listener, on that test.

Ten of those tests, would produce a very good indication whether any individual listener was able to differentiate.

 

Well I'm leaving the office today at about 4pm, so perhaps JCB or Brian can vote and we can have a result by the time I get home - about 6-ish

 

personally, would like to see it up for a bit longer.

Cant we reach 50 votes?

With many hundreds of people viewing the thread, I'm sure this is possible.

Come on mr Lurker, stop lurking.

 

No problem if you can get input from other forums.
I don't k now how they'd feel about putting direct links to this thread - best seek permission/advice from the forum owners IMO.

 

I've voted, Brian will perhaps make it 20.

If you want 50 voters probably another test would suit.

 

p.s. Several of the other forums have run their own tests.

 

HI JCbrum

I don't see anything wrong with the test.

You cant tell the files apart by looking at them.

The files are small and easy to download.

It's a mixed, well recorded track with various instruments on it.

 

who will umm & ahh with the casting vote ???

 

That might be difficult. I think it's in the side pocket of a Shuttle PC carry case in the upstairs bedroom in Nicosia - and I'm in Southampton.

The case is clear - no one can tell!

D-Dur Internet Radio is streamed in lossy OGG at about 240kb/s, and the same programme material is simultaneously streamed losslessly using FLAC in an OGG container. I listened extensively to both, eighteen months ago, and could flick between them instantly since there were fed into separate inputs of my Caiman DAC. I couldn't tell them apart unless I looked at the LEDs on the DAC to tell me which input was active.

 

But just a minute? Don't we need to know the quality of the DAC and following analogue chain of each voter? No one stands any chance of hearing a difference on laptop speakers, but Rob's electrostatics or JCBrum's active monitors ought to be more resolving.

 

It's not really about the quality as such but if theres a difference you can hear & prefer

played through the computer I can hear a difference .. that's enough for this test surely?

 

I'm using skype headphones and the doghsit whiny output of my laptop

 

I tend to think of any sort of compressed music as being computer orientated, if there's no difference via a basic computer set-up then the compression has done it's job.

Didn't even bother downloading, just play straight out of the browser.

 

I am confused about what that means.

1. There is the dynamic compression applied to the music to limit the loud to soft range, which makes it easier to listen to on tranny, cheap PC speakers or in the car.

2. There is the data compression used on the computer files to save on storage or transmission bandwidth. There are two sorts of that.

a. Lossy - like MP3, AAC, OGG - some data is removed according to rules that minimise impact on the music quality.

b. Lossless - like FLAC, ALAC - no datais thrown away - the file is just zipped and unzipped - it is restored to its original form without any loss of detail.

We are comparing a and b not music with and without dynamic compression.

Sorry if I am teaching Granny to suck eggs, but I cannot unpack Coda's comment.

 

I'd argue that headphones on a PC are actually better at revealing these differences than a good audio system via speakers. You might well enjoy the full system more, but as an analytical tool a pair of headphones will often reveal subtleties lost via speakers.