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: 32kbps public listening test - OPEN (Read 57025 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #75 –
Quote
Full ack!


Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #76 –
Quote
According to the presentation page, only Vorbis got the special SSRC resampling. If so, was it checked and how and by who, that the other codecs using 32khz sampling didnt have resampling induced quality drop (like vanilla Vorbis) ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226243"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Nobody showed up to test the other codecs. I am grateful (and the vorbis people should also be) to dev0 for checking it out.

Quote
Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.


 

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #77 –
Quote
Quote
According to the presentation page, only Vorbis got the special SSRC resampling. If so, was it checked and how and by who, that the other codecs using 32khz sampling didnt have resampling induced quality drop (like vanilla Vorbis) ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226243"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Nobody showed up to test the other codecs. I am grateful (and the vorbis people should also be) to dev0 for checking it out.

Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
Juha Laaksonheimo

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #78 –
Quote
Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226248"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As I remember it, you mentioned SSRC resampling needed to be supported in a streaming software to make it's usage meaningful for this test.

dev0 found out it can be done for Vorbis with fb2k. It can't be done for WMA std and QDesign because neither windows media server nor Darwin streaming server use or support SSRC. Shoutcast (probably the most popular MP3 streamer, based on Lame) doesn't use SSRC either. Same thing about Real Broadcaster.

So there.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #79 –
Quote
Quote
Right. Imo then the correct procedure would have been to use SSRC for all the resamplings, or not use it at all. Now only one codec got the benefit just because someone happened to test it for Vorbis.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226248"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As I remember it, you mentioned SSRC resampling needed to be supported in a streaming software to make it's usage meaningful for this test.
So there.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226254"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I said, at least, being a reason in order to justify the use of 3rd party component somehow. Before the test I privately said to you the same as here that all resampling should be done with SSRC or none at all. You said you can't consider any of my suggestions anymore because I'm too biased against Vorbis.
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.
Since the other codecs using resampling didnt get tested or treated equally to Vorbis, we can only hope that there's no resampling issues which would affect the results negatively for the other codecs.
Juha Laaksonheimo

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #80 –
Quote
Quote
Full ack!


Anyone noticed what you get when inverting end of both words?
Reading quickly, I get this one inverted. The meaning is then completely different.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226245"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's exactly what I read first !
 

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #81 –
Quote
Since the other codecs using resampling didnt get tested or treated equally to Vorbis, we can only hope that there's no resampling issues which would affect the results negatively for the other codecs.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226256"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If Vorbis performs bad, nobody will care about it. If it comes first, for sure it's an issue !

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #82 –
Quote
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


True. But you gotta consider that I'm only one person that doesn't do listening tests himself and, particularly on this test, was on a limited time frame. In this aspect, Vorbis can be considered lucky that it had an enthusiatic individual that looked into this issue and found a solution. Unfortunately, WMA, Real and QDesign didn't have anyone to look out for them.

It's similar to the issue with the iTunes MP3 encoder in the MP3 listening test. There has been lots of speculation about iTunes maybe being better in CBR at 128kbps, but noone took the initiative to test VBR vs. CBR while the test was being discussed.

[a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18378&view=findpost&p=181882]http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=181882[/url]

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #83 –
Quote
Quote
IIRC you also said that streaming server use isn't the point of this test, rather how the codec can do in best circumstances. Non-live streaming is perfectly possible for all codecs with SSRC.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226256"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's similar to the issue with the iTunes MP3 encoder in the MP3 listening test. There has been lots of speculation about iTunes maybe being better in CBR at 128kbps, but noone took the initiative to test VBR vs. CBR while the test was being discussed.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226292"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Imo it was not similar. In your example it was about internal encoding setting. In resampling issue it was about the use of external 3rd party component which is possible to use for all resampled codecs.
Juha Laaksonheimo

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #84 –
I thought this had been discussed into the ground a couple of pages ago?

Vorbis was the only encoder that was shown to have issues with its internal resampler, so there should be no need to use SSRC with the other codecs in the test.
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #85 –
Quote
I thought this had been discussed into the ground a couple of pages ago?

Vorbis was the only encoder that was shown to have issues with its internal resampler, so there should be no need to use SSRC with the other codecs in the test.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226297"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Eh, how do you know if there was need or not if it was not tested!
It is perfectly possible that this issue is a non-issue, but without testing we simply don't know, thus if not tested, we should treat the codecs equally. This is my opinion.
So, even if this resampling issue turned out to be irrelevant regarding the other codecs, this imo shows somewhat questionable testing practice, especially considering that there is a 3rd party component involved.
Juha Laaksonheimo

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #86 –
Ogg Vorbis is quite new, open source and it's development is in progress.
I understood the SSRC issue always in such a way, that for this test, Ogg Vorbis samples were prepared, that show the potential at 32 kbps in comparison to established codecs.
That's quite fair for a codec in development.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #87 –
Quote
Ogg Vorbis is quite new, open source and it's development is in progress.
I understood the SSRC issue always in such a way, that for this test, Ogg Vorbis samples were prepared, that show the potential at 32 kbps in comparison to established codecs.
That's quite fair for a codec in development.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226299"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you ask from Monty, he will tell you that Vorbis is about 10 years old project of his.
Juha Laaksonheimo

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #88 –
Quote
That's quite fair for a codec in development.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226299"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ogg Vorbis is not the only codec that´s in development.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #89 –
I was away (holiday) the last weeks. And now I would like to make the test, too. But in the first posting you write that the test is scheduled to end at July 11th but the title says "OPEN".

So is the test open or closed already?

Thanx
Big_Berny

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #90 –
Quote
I was away (holiday) the last weeks. And now I would like to make the test, too. But in the first posting you write that the test is scheduled to end at July 11th but the title says "OPEN".

So is the test open or closed already?

Thanx
Big_Berny[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226320"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I plan to start calculating results this afternoon, so yes, you can pretty safely consider it closed :/

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #91 –
Quote
I plan to start calculating results this afternoon, so yes, you can pretty safely consider it closed :/
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=226322"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Wll, that's bad news... Sorry, that I couldn't do the test. I hope you have enough results!

Big_Berny

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #92 –
Still no results? 

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #93 –
rjamorim you're being very quiet, you OK? or have you gone into shock cos of the results?

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #94 –
Quote
rjamorim you're being very quiet, you OK? or have you gone into shock cos of the results?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227861"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Too much wine at the family parties?
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #95 –
erhm... i know 56k is slow, but shouldn't the results be in by now? 

anyway looking forward to the results, thanks for the effort.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #96 –
Hope everything's OK.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #97 –
me too, the suspense is killing me
 

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #98 –
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Off-topic posts split here.[/span]
Happiness - The agreeable sensation of contemplating the misery of others.

32kbps public listening test - OPEN

Reply #99 –
Hey, what happened to rjamorim? Now, even his website http://www.rjamorim.com/ is down.

EDIT: His site is online again