rockefeller center Posted January 12, 2004 Report Share Posted January 12, 2004 (edited) Rockefeller center, what MP3 encoder are you going to use, and what encoder settings? Just curious... I used RazorLame, 320 kbps, stereo, variable bitrate disabled. Edited January 12, 2004 by rockefeller center Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 I've done a test very similar to this once (but using 256k) and I didn't have any problem picking out the MP3 tracks with my stereo, headphone amp, and a relatively cheap pair of headphones. I'll be curious to see the results of this. At what point do YOU think the differences become noticeable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 I'll ask a slightly different question: at which point do the differeces become *objectionable*? The thing is, mp3 is a way to compress music files - and in order to compress them you have to remove data from them. Hence it's "lossy" nature. You can't have your cake, so to speak, and eat it to. I don't doubt that some could distinguish between a wav file and an mp3 of same in a controled test - I can clearly hear differences (and not pleasant ones) in some badly-encoded mp3s (such as the early ones on emusic). But there comes a point where the drop in fidelity doesn't bother me and I have a very hard time hearing any compression artifacts in a 256K mp3 file. I always laugh when some of those who trade bootleg concert recordings refuse to listen to or compress to mp3. Many were originally recorded on cassette tapes with a built-in mic - believe me, you're not losing much by using mp3. (The gaps between tracks is another thing though.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Fair enough-- that is really the question I have in mind. I have no problem with MP3 for what they are-- however, the point of the bootleg traders is twofold. One is pure sound quality, in which I agree with you, but the other is a simple commitment to the most exact copy possible. Thus I only deal with and trade SHN or other lossless formats-- because as you say, when something is an audience taping and already of lowered quality, I don't want it further diluted. Also, with SHN that is of pure lineage, you know you are getting the best possible copy-- hundreds of poorly produced MP3s start floating around and it becomes impossible to locate the best, particularly when they get converted back to WAV, then re-ripped to MP3, etc... MP3 sourced files are the bane of trading, particularly to those who can hear the difference. Better just not to go there at all in my opinion. But I love MP3, I own a few portable players and rip a lot of my CDs to MP3, so it is clearly a good and useful format! Burning TAO is clearly a sin Incidentally, the test we did was using Razor Lame at 256k, but we did VBR, so not the best test even at that rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockefeller center Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Fair enough-- that is really the question I have in mind. I have no problem with MP3 for what they are-- however, the point of the bootleg traders is twofold. One is pure sound quality, in which I agree with you, but the other is a simple commitment to the most exact copy possible. Thus I only deal with and trade SHN or other lossless formats-- because as you say, when something is an audience taping and already of lowered quality, I don't want it further diluted. Also, with SHN that is of pure lineage, you know you are getting the best possible copy-- hundreds of poorly produced MP3s start floating around and it becomes impossible to locate the best, particularly when they get converted back to WAV, then re-ripped to MP3, etc... MP3 sourced files are the bane of trading, particularly to those who can hear the difference. Better just not to go there at all in my opinion. Amen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Burning TAO is clearly a sin Aaargh!!! Agreed! It's funny how our opinions differ, in part, on how we use mp3s. I don't have an mp3 player and generally burn my mp3s onto CDRs as wav files. So since storing the files on my computer isn't that much of a concern for me, I've been d/l'ing shns a lot more than when I started. But it's not the quality of the shns that I like (though I admit it can be much better) than that damn half-second pop you get between mp3 tracks on a live recording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 Incidentally, there are a number of great programs for doing your own a/b testing with MP3 tracks yourself that take all the work out of it and allow you to test yourself reliably. It is interesting to test yourself on what you think you know and how "golden" your ears really are. I am doing a bunch of testing of my own ears with various Lame MP3 encoding settings and the results are interesting/distressing so far I've gotten to the point where I don't listen much to people's opinions unless they have ab tested-- it's amazing how much we THINK we hear! I'm using foobar2000, which is also a player for just about every format on the planet. But there are also some dedicated programs. They all basically allow you to select some tracks and then the computer plays them for you randomly as many times as you wish and record which one is "better" or "matches" the source, keeping statistics for you and eliminating the placebo effect and other bias. http://www.pcabx.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Dye Posted January 16, 2004 Report Share Posted January 16, 2004 foobar2000 is a GREAT program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmilovan Posted January 21, 2004 Report Share Posted January 21, 2004 Well, it seems to me there is no difference in either of them. But, my system certainly is kind of low end, even it has at least one good component - Marantz CD4000 CD player. I made quite exhausted test of yours disc, and did not manage to play track number 9. Due to hearing it many times, I won't play "Freddie..." for months - I can't stand it! Again, I can not hear the difference, maybe on some more expensive system it can be heard. But let me try - track 2 and 7. Probably - track 9 (I did not hear it on my CD). If it's not, than yours test is success, at least for owner of crappy hi-fi or crappy hearing capabilities. I think that I must nail exact tracks if there are differences. How about other people who took part in this audio blindfold test? Milan BTW The other fine test could be also blindfolded. Unfortunately, it can not be done via post office. I thought about such test that will involve original and copied to CDR media discs, and differences (if there any) between them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son-of-a-Weizen Posted February 3, 2004 Report Share Posted February 3, 2004 I surrender!!! Played the disc on two basic systems (Sony CD + Denon amp + 25-year-old recently rebuilt Advent speakers.........and then again on a Sony cheapo DVD/CD unit + Yamaha receiver + the other pair of re-built Advent speakers. Like mmilovan, I'm all played out and can't tell the difference........but just for the heck of it, we'll guess #6 & #7. It was fun though --- thanks Rockefeller Zentrum! So what's the answer, Mr. Wizard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockefeller center Posted February 4, 2004 Report Share Posted February 4, 2004 #2 & #5 are the mp3s. Must have been a pain to go through that disc. Thanks for listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmilovan Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 RC, can you recognize mp3 on some good system when played in such string (mixed up with wav)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockefeller center Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 (edited) RC, can you recognize mp3 on some good system when played in such string (mixed up with wav)? I have never listened to such a disc on a good system. Played two tracks from the disc I sent to you on my stereo but couldn't distinguish between the formats (decent Marantz components, cheap Canton speakers). Generally, MP3s encoded at low bitrate (<196kbps) are easy to identify, I think. edit: schpelling Edited February 12, 2004 by rockefeller center Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son-of-a-Weizen Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 I put that disc in my car and have been listening to a continuous loop of 'Freddie Freeloader'. Is that healthy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockefeller center Posted February 12, 2004 Report Share Posted February 12, 2004 Put a label reading "Party Mix" on it and throw it out of the car while driving and have your co-driver take a picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.