Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer (Read 8217 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

I've been using this plugin to try and determine what bitrate is transparent for me using the new opus codec.  The problem is that I'm scoring PERFECTLY on my tests even at as high of a bitrate as 256.  While the song does the become clearer and more detailed the higher the bitrate climbs, one very subtle difference always remains that allows me to distinguish between the two and skew the results in my favor. 

The volume of the lossy version in comparison to the lossless one seems to be ever so slightly lower?  It's not that the song is quieter, it just sounds less powerful in delivery.    At first I though the problem was with the codec given how young it is, so I encoded another version in ogg vorbis at -q 5 (hydrogenaudio wiki reports this quality setting as transparent).  Still, I got basically the same results (only 1 wrong after repeating the test three times). 

My hearing simply CANNOT be this finely tuned, so what am I doing wrong?  Perhaps there's a setting I've overlooked?  I tried applying ReplayGain but the comparator seems to ignore it.  Maybe it's the fact that the songs' peaks are different?  This is my first time ever running these tests so I'd really appreciate it if somebody can provide some clarification.  Thank you!!

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #1 –
Do you take a lossless song -> convert it to lossy -> load both to abx without dsp/replaygain? In that case the volume should be the same. I haven't noticed any volume variation in my tests. You also might have good ears, too. I know that for me mp3 starts getting transparent around v2, but I still can distinguish between them even if it's extremely hard.

For example, here is v3
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/08 19:01:55

File A: 03 ゆうまお - 蒼空にくちづけたら.flac
File B: 03 蒼空にくちづけたら_v3.mp3

19:01:55 : Test started.
19:02:40 : 01/01  50.0%
19:03:09 : 02/02  25.0%
19:03:21 : 03/03  12.5%
19:04:00 : 04/04  6.3%
19:04:42 : 05/05  3.1%
19:05:02 : 06/06  1.6%
19:05:22 : 07/07  0.8%
19:05:43 : 08/08  0.4%
19:05:54 : 09/09  0.2%
19:06:16 : 10/10  0.1%
19:06:19 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 10/10 (0.1%)

And here's v0
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/08 19:20:26

File A: 03 蒼空にくちづけたら.flac
File B: 03 蒼空にくちづけたら_v0.mp3

19:20:26 : Test started.
19:21:02 : 01/01  50.0%
19:21:12 : 01/02  75.0%
19:21:34 : 02/03  50.0%
19:21:47 : 03/04  31.3%
19:21:57 : 03/05  50.0%
19:22:09 : 03/06  65.6%
19:22:29 : 03/07  77.3%
19:22:58 : 04/08  63.7%
19:23:13 : 05/09  50.0%
19:23:24 : 06/10  37.7%
19:23:44 : 07/11  27.4%
19:24:09 : 07/12  38.7%
19:24:12 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 7/12 (38.7%)

Point is, just because a codec is generally transparent for people doesn't mean it is for you.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #2 –
Quote from: ChronoSphere on
Do you take a lossless song -> convert it to lossy -> load both to abx without dsp/replaygain? In that case the volume should be the same.

Really?

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #3 –
Yes, unless you applied replay gain while converting to lossy.
Even if the lossless track has replay gain, it will be transcoded to wav without applying the value by the abx plugin.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #4 –
Quote from: ChronoSphere on
Do you take a lossless song -> convert it to lossy -> load both to abx without dsp/replaygain? In that case the volume should be the same. I haven't noticed any volume variation in my tests. You also might have good ears, too. I know that for me mp3 starts getting transparent around v2, but I still can distinguish between them even if it's extremely hard.

I use a lossless source and then convert it to lossy.  Following that I load both into abx.
This happens with or without replaygain, but i'll run another test just be sure. 

Here are my previous results:

Opus 256
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/10 11:12:33

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.opus

11:12:33 : Test started.
11:13:13 : 01/01  50.0%
11:13:21 : 02/02  25.0%
11:13:29 : 03/03  12.5%
11:13:40 : 04/04  6.3%
11:13:49 : 05/05  3.1%
11:14:02 : 06/06  1.6%
11:14:12 : 07/07  0.8%
11:14:30 : 08/08  0.4%
11:14:38 : 09/09  0.2%
11:15:17 : 10/10  0.1%
11:15:25 : 11/11  0.0%
11:15:44 : 12/12  0.0%
11:15:50 : 13/13  0.0%
11:16:11 : 14/14  0.0%
11:16:25 : 15/15  0.0%
11:16:35 : 16/16  0.0%
11:16:46 : 17/17  0.0%
11:17:15 : 18/18  0.0%
11:17:23 : 19/19  0.0%
11:17:32 : 20/20  0.0%
11:18:06 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 20/20 (0.0%)

Ogg Vorbis -q 5
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/10 10:07:38

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.ogg

10:07:38 : Test started.
10:09:07 : 01/01  50.0%
10:09:18 : 02/02  25.0%
10:09:33 : 03/03  12.5%
10:10:57 : 04/04  6.3%
10:11:10 : 04/05  18.8%
10:11:20 : 05/06  10.9%
10:11:34 : 06/07  6.3%
10:11:48 : 07/08  3.5%
10:11:58 : 07/09  9.0%
10:12:13 : 08/10  5.5%
10:12:21 : 09/11  3.3%
10:12:55 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 9/11 (3.3%)

I didn't go to 20 on the vorbis test because at the time I wasn't sure if it was the codec or not.



--------------------------UPDATE----------------------------
So I ran the test again after highlighting both tracks and selecting "remove ReplayGain information from files" and ran the ABX test.  This time it felt more difficult, though I could still detect a slight difference in how "powerful" the samples sounded.  Maybe the reason why I was able to detect the nuances more easily before was because foobar uses album gain by default (I remember reading that somewhere), so perhaps when I converted to lossy, that information might have been carried over.  If what chronosphere says about how abx treats replaygain values is true, then this could be an explanation.  Anyway, here are my results with opus at 256 and no ReplayGain:

Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/10 15:00:27

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.opus

15:00:27 : Test started.
15:01:06 : 01/01  50.0%
15:01:19 : 02/02  25.0%
15:01:38 : 03/03  12.5%
15:01:57 : 03/04  31.3%
15:02:06 : 04/05  18.8%
15:02:22 : 05/06  10.9%
15:02:31 : 06/07  6.3%
15:02:41 : 07/08  3.5%
15:03:06 : 08/09  2.0%
15:03:51 : 09/10  1.1%
15:04:07 : 10/11  0.6%
15:04:27 : 10/12  1.9%
15:04:43 : 11/13  1.1%
15:05:33 : 12/14  0.6%
15:05:42 : 13/15  0.4%
15:05:54 : 14/16  0.2%
15:06:27 : 15/17  0.1%
15:06:40 : 16/18  0.1%
15:07:04 : 17/19  0.0%
15:07:27 : 18/20  0.0%
15:08:08 : Test finished.

I am open to running another test with higher bitrates or another codec like vorbis if any of you think it's necessary or are interested.
 

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #5 –
Fear Factory is not something that is easy to encode. Also, I suspect that flac and opus files have different samplerates - maybe this also affects ABXing.

Quote from: juscor on
I am open to running another test with higher bitrates or another codec like vorbis if any of you think it's necessary or are interested.

Do you use official Vorbis or AoTuV? Try  latest AoTuV -q 7.

Other very good codecs: Musepack (quality 6), Apple AAC (via qaac;  tvbr 100), or Winamp FhG AAC (quality 5).

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #6 –
Quote from: lvqcl on
Fear Factory is not something that is easy to encode. Also, I suspect that flac and opus files have different samplerates - maybe this also affects ABXing.

Sounds reasonable. It was mostly in the sections where all the instruments were active at once that I could detect the differences.  I highly doubt with something less "complex" that I would be able to make the same distinctions. 

Quote from: lvqcl on
Do you use official Vorbis or AoTuV? Try  latest AoTuV -q 7.

Other very good codecs: Musepack (quality 6), Apple AAC (via qaac;  tvbr 100), or Winamp FhG AAC (quality 5).

I use the latest AoTuV encoder with the LancerMod.  I only tested it at -q 5 though.  I'll try -q 7 as well as the other codecs you recommended tomorrow morning and update the thread accordingly.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #7 –
Quote from: juscor on
I use the latest AoTuV encoder with the LancerMod.
Are there AoTuV/Lancer encoders newer than from 2006? I didn't find any. Nevertheless even a Vorbis encoder that old should perform reasonably enough. Maybe you just encountered a problematic track, or you are susceptible to Vorbis and CELT artifacts. Have you tried any other tracks?
It's only audiophile if it's inconvenient.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #9 –
Which version of Opus do you use?
Would be also good to upload the sample you used here.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #10 –
Quote from: Gainless on
Which version of Opus do you use?
https://people.xiph.org/~greg/opus-tools_58d80ab.zip
It's the second 1.1 pre-beta build linked in this thread by jmvalin: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=101061

I'll try and upload my samples.  Might take a little while since my connection is unstable.


Anyway, I tested vorbis at -q 7 and MPC at -q 6.  It was definitely more difficult to discriminate between the two samples with vorbis, and even moreso with MPC (it had more "oomph" to it).  I had to sit there for a while listening to the samples before starting my tests just to get a feel for them.  I ended up scoring lower with MPC, and I'd say it's extremely near transparent, if not transparent already.  I tested it 3 times more than vorbis just to be sure that I was actually perceiving it as more difficult.

ogg vorbis -q7 results:
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][color=#FF0000][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--]1[/size][/color][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 08:27:36

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.ogg

08:27:36 : Test started.
08:28:09 : 01/01  50.0%
08:28:20 : 02/02  25.0%
08:28:27 : 03/03  12.5%
08:28:34 : 04/04  6.3%
08:28:42 : 05/05  3.1%
08:29:17 : 05/06  10.9%
08:29:23 : 06/07  6.3%
08:29:32 : 06/08  14.5%
08:29:39 : 07/09  9.0%
08:29:47 : 07/10  17.2%
08:30:03 : 08/11  11.3%
08:30:06 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 8/11 (11.3%)


foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#FF8C00]2[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 08:31:07

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.ogg

08:31:07 : Test started.
08:32:03 : 01/01  50.0%
08:32:24 : 02/02  25.0%
08:32:40 : 03/03  12.5%
08:32:49 : 04/04  6.3%
08:32:56 : 04/05  18.8%
08:33:03 : 05/06  10.9%
08:33:23 : 06/07  6.3%
08:33:37 : 07/08  3.5%
08:33:44 : 08/09  2.0%
08:34:43 : 09/10  1.1%
08:35:14 : 10/11  0.6%
08:35:41 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 10/11 (0.6%)



foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#FFFF00]3[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/10 10:14:47

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.ogg

10:14:47 : Test started.
10:15:38 : 01/01  50.0%
10:15:49 : 02/02  25.0%
10:16:05 : 03/03  12.5%
10:16:22 : 03/04  31.3%
10:16:33 : 04/05  18.8%
10:16:55 : 04/06  34.4%
10:17:05 : 05/07  22.7%
10:17:22 : 06/08  14.5%
10:17:38 : 07/09  9.0%
10:18:47 : 08/10  5.5%
10:19:07 : 09/11  3.3%
10:22:05 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 9/11 (3.3%)



MPC -q 7 Results
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#9ACD32]1[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 08:53:44

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.mpc

08:53:44 : Test started.
08:57:54 : 01/01  50.0%
08:58:01 : 01/02  75.0%
08:58:11 : 02/03  50.0%
08:58:28 : 03/04  31.3%
08:58:46 : 04/05  18.8%
08:59:12 : 05/06  10.9%
08:59:23 : 06/07  6.3%
08:59:38 : 06/08  14.5%
08:59:50 : 07/09  9.0%
09:00:11 : 08/10  5.5%
09:00:58 : 08/11  11.3%
09:01:04 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 8/11 (11.3%)


foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#FF00FF]2[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 09:54:48

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.mpc

09:54:48 : Test started.
09:55:14 : 01/01  50.0%
09:55:21 : 02/02  25.0%
09:55:44 : 02/03  50.0%
09:56:11 : 03/04  31.3%
09:56:30 : 03/05  50.0%
09:57:37 : 04/06  34.4%
09:58:06 : 05/07  22.7%
09:58:17 : 06/08  14.5%
09:58:44 : 06/09  25.4%
09:59:45 : 07/10  17.2%
10:00:24 : 08/11  11.3%
10:00:31 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 8/11 (11.3%)


foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#00FFFF]3[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 09:42:28

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.mpc

09:42:28 : Test started.
09:43:12 : 01/01  50.0%
09:45:30 : 02/02  25.0%
09:45:38 : 02/03  50.0%
09:46:04 : 02/04  68.8%
09:46:22 : 03/05  50.0%
09:46:36 : 03/06  65.6%
09:47:18 : 04/07  50.0%
09:47:46 : 05/08  36.3%
09:48:01 : 06/09  25.4%
09:48:11 : 07/10  17.2%
09:48:22 : 08/11  11.3%
09:48:34 : Trial reset.
09:48:57 : 01/01  50.0%
09:49:17 : 01/02  75.0%
09:49:43 : 02/03  50.0%
09:50:38 : 03/04  31.3%
09:51:19 : 03/05  50.0%
09:52:24 : 04/06  34.4%
09:52:50 : 05/07  22.7%
09:53:03 : 06/08  14.5%
09:53:22 : 07/09  9.0%
09:53:37 : 08/10  5.5%
09:54:04 : 09/11  3.3%
09:54:06 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 17/22 (0.8%)



foo_abx 1.3.4 report [u][i][b][!--sizeo:4--][span style=\"font-size:14pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--][color=#00FF00]4[/color][/size][/b][/i][/u]
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/11 10:01:32

File A: C:\Users\XXXXX\Music\Cuetools Coverted\Fear Factory\1995 - Demanufacture (Digipak)\01. Demanufacture.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Fear Factory - Demanufacture (Digipak)\Fear Factory - Demanufacture.mpc

10:01:32 : Test started.
10:04:18 : 01/01  50.0%
10:04:46 : 02/02  25.0%
10:05:08 : 03/03  12.5%
10:05:19 : 03/04  31.3%
10:05:57 : 04/05  18.8%
10:06:08 : 05/06  10.9%
10:06:22 : 06/07  6.3%
10:06:39 : 07/08  3.5%
10:06:51 : 08/09  2.0%
10:07:52 : 09/10  1.1%
10:08:11 : 09/11  3.3%
10:08:18 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 9/11 (3.3%)

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #11 –
Good to hear as it will be interesting for others to be able to test/analyse this. Do please ensure that any sample uploaded or linked here is ≤ 30 seconds in length.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #12 –
Are there any opus splitters out yet?  Trying to find one to make the sample but it seems they don't exist.  Should I just convert it to wav and cut it that way instead?

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #13 –
Quote from: juscor on
Should I just convert it to wav and cut it that way instead?

There should be no problem in doing so.
(As long as the audio editor you're using handles the conversion right, and most do)

Edit: maybe you should avoid dithering the output. I know Audacity for instance does that by default and it is not desirable if converting to the same bit depth and sample rate as the source, as it (basically) ads noise which could interfere in the ABX process.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #14 –
It would be simpler to just post the (edited) flac file and let other do their own encoding.

How sure are you that this is truly lossless? If at any time it had been lossy encoded then that could cause problems with subsequent lossy encoding.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #15 –
Quote from: pdq on
How sure are you that this is truly lossless? If at any time it had been lossy encoded then that could cause problems with subsequent lossy encoding.

Well, if there aren't obvious lowpasses or a reference to compare the peaks we can't be 100% sure anyway.

@OP
Just download Audacity and disable the dither at the "Quality" settings for cutting.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #17 –
Quote from: pdq on
Actually, lame applies a scale factor by default for lower bitrates.

Thanks for explaining. At this point, I figured I must've missed something.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #18 –
Question: am I interpreting my results (see above) correctly? As in, mp3 v0 is still not completely transparent to me. Or should I count 38% guessing as transparent?

Quote from: pdq on
Quote from: aztec_mystic on
Quote from: ChronoSphere on
Do you take a lossless song -> convert it to lossy -> load both to abx without dsp/replaygain? In that case the volume should be the same.

Really?

Actually, lame applies a scale factor by default for lower bitrates.
Ah, that would explain why it's so much easier to distinguish then.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #19 –
Yes, 38% guessing means nothing at all.
You should get at 5% guessing or below, and you should decide in advance whether you will do 5 trials (you need a 5/5 result then), or 8 trial (you need a 7/8 result then), or whatever you like to do.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #20 –
To look at it from a statistical/experimental perspective: A value of 5% corresponds to a p-value/significance level of 0.05, a generally accepted standard for determining whether observed effects/trends can be statistically distinguished from chance/noise. The p-value represents the probability that the observed result could have occurred purely by chance, i.e. could have occurred under the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis posits that the treatment in question (lossy compression, administration of medication, etc.) has no effect. Thus, by obtaining a p-value below a reasonable significance level, one can suggest with confidence that the null hypothesis is false and therefore that the treatment does have an effect.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #21 –
Quote from: pdq on
It would be simpler to just post the (edited) flac file and let other do their own encoding.

How sure are you that this is truly lossless? If at any time it had been lossy encoded then that could cause problems with subsequent lossy encoding.

Unless I have false memories, I am certain that this is a lossless encoding ripped directly from CD source.
Plus, I've heard lossy--->losslesss--->lossy encodes before and this definitely doesn't sound like one of them.


Quote from: Gainless on
Well, if there aren't obvious lowpasses or a reference to compare the peaks we can't be 100% sure anyway.

@OP
Just download Audacity and disable the dither at the "Quality" settings for cutting.

I ended up using WavSplitter since I've never used audacity and this looked much simpler.


I'll upload the original, uncut lossless version alongside the samples if anybody wants to experiment and encode their own versions.  I'm new to this site, so if this violates any TOS, let me know and I will take down the link.  I'm uploading as I type this so the links should be up today.  It's just going painfully slow.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #22 –
Quote from: juscor on
I'll upload the original, uncut lossless version alongside the samples if anybody wants to experiment and encode their own versions.  I'm new to this site, so if this violates any TOS, let me know and I will take down the link.
Take it down? You can’t post it here in the first place. Rather than wondering aloud whether doing so would violate any rules, you could go and read them. You were asked to do so during registration, even. All of that aside, I already saved you the toil by posting earlier in this thread what the rules clearly state:
Quote from: db1989 on
Do please ensure that any sample uploaded or linked here is ? 30 seconds in length.

If your goal is to provide a lossless version for others to use, what exactly is stopping you from trimming that to 30 seconds beforehand?

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #23 –
Quote from: db1989 on
Quote from: juscor on
I'll upload the original, uncut lossless version alongside the samples if anybody wants to experiment and encode their own versions.  I'm new to this site, so if this violates any TOS, let me know and I will take down the link.
Take it down? You can’t post it here in the first place. Rather than wondering aloud whether doing so would violate any rules, you could go and read them. You were asked to do so during registration, even. All of that aside, I already saved you the toil by posting earlier in this thread what the rules clearly state:
Quote from: db1989 on
Do please ensure that any sample uploaded or linked here is ? 30 seconds in length.

If your goal is to provide a lossless version for others to use, what exactly is stopping you from trimming that to 30 seconds beforehand?


My apologies, I admit I did not read the TOS for which I have no excuse.  I also forgot about your ? 30 seconds rule post when I read the other poster's suggestion about uploading the song.  I read too quickly and thought others might have wanted to experiment with other portions of the song is all.

Excluding the song the in its entirety, here are the samples as promised.  They are 20 seconds in length and in wav:
Lossless
MPC -q 6
Opus 256
Vorbis -q 7

I'll upload the other bitrate versions i tested tonight.  I also tested Vorbis at -q 5, and Opus at 160, 144, 128, 96, 80, and 64 if you'd rather encode at these bitrates now using the lossless sample I provided.

NOTE:  As I mentioned earlier, the difference between the lossy and lossless version is very subtle (lossy sounds slightly less powerful).  Before starting the test, I recommend listening to both very closely to get a feeling for them.  Once you notice (if you do) what I'm talking about, it becomes easier to discriminate between the encodes. I also recommend going in with fresh ears since it's hard to concentrate and pick up the differences otherwise.

One more thing, if you don't like heavy metal with harsh vocals, then I advise against listening to my sample. Listening to it over and over again will quickly get on your nerves.  Hell, I like the song and it still vexed me.

Unsure if I am conducting my ABX Comparator tests properly/first timer

Reply #24 –
Just tested a slow paced, rather simple rap song at MPC -q 6.  8/11 was my result:
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.2.6
2013/06/13 08:43:18

File A: L:\Libraries\Music\Gravediggaz - Niggamortis\08 - 1-800 Suicide.flac
File B: L:\Libraries\Music\Gravediggaz - 1-800 Suicide.mpc

08:43:18 : Test started.
08:47:59 : 01/01  50.0%
08:48:07 : 02/02  25.0%
08:48:19 : 02/03  50.0%
08:49:16 : 03/04  31.3%
08:49:40 : 04/05  18.8%
08:49:56 : 04/06  34.4%
08:50:06 : 04/07  50.0%
08:50:16 : 05/08  36.3%
08:51:35 : 06/09  25.4%
08:52:25 : 07/10  17.2%
08:53:55 : 08/11  11.3%
08:54:29 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 8/11 (11.3%)

I think for all intents and purposes, MPC at this quality setting is transparent to me.  Given this test result as well as my previous ones, I'll be sticking to this codec for now.  I doubt Vorbis or Opus will perform better for me.  Also, looking at opus bitrates, it seems that its vbr isn't quality based, but ABR based.  I'll give this codec some time to mature before I make the switch.