Nero AAC, listening test :-)
Reply #13 – 2002-12-01 02:45:14
44 khz/128 kbit: ----------- velvet_44khz_128_aac orig vs a abx 13/16 not preecho, but some burps added to the last part of the drum (post echo?). orig vs b abx 13/16 (not easy) hiss in the background is a bit to loud or artifical, especialy in the right channel. a vs b abx 12/16 (p=0.038) hard to say which one is better, probably a. ---------------------------------------------- applaud_44khz_128_aac orig vs a abx 5/5 (didnt bother) smearing in the background at the end of the sample and the 'thank you' part has some high frequencies that arent there in original. orig vs b didnt bother preecho, a bit less smearing in the background a vs b abx 12/16 hard to say which one is better, probably a. ---------------------------------------------- bullet_44khz_128_aac orig vs a abx 5/5 didnt bother, the same stereo error as with fatboy at the beggining, other than that i cant hear any problems orig vs b didnt bother, the same stereo error as with fatboy at the beggining, other than that i cant hear any problems cant abx a vs b ----------------------------------------------fatboy_44khz_128_aac orig vs a 1st try cant abx orig vs a 2nd try abx 10/11 (p=0.006) - 1st time i overlooked the stereo error, this time i just listened from 1st second on to ignore the error. (less defined than sample b, but without dropouts) orig vs b abx 16/16 stereo error at the beginning 2nd try - this time ignoring the stereo error at the beginning abx 8/8 something weird on 3s-5s - short dropouts i cant say which one is better, probably a. conclusion: i will always rate sample that is less defined better than sample with hiss or high-frequency drop-outs, for me most of this samples (128kbit/44khz) are close to transparency and it wasnt easy to abx them against original.