What does ABX really prove? Options

[audioslut512]

I recently did some ABX tests of music encoded in FLAC levels 0-8.

To my surprise I could tell the difference more often than not.

Yet I couldn't help but wonder, what does this really prove?

It seems that if an audible difference exists between two tracks, that difference wouldn't necessarily indicate anything as to which track is of higher quality, but rather, that those two tracks are merely different from one another...

Am I missing the point in all of this?

[greynol]

I concur with the first response you were given, btw. Telling us that you can tell an audible difference between flac compression levels brings your methodology into serious question.

[audioslut512]

I concur with the first response you were given, btw. Telling us that you can tell an audible difference between flac compression levels brings your methodology into serious question.

To clarify, I didn't mean to say I could tell the difference between FLAC 0-8 more often than not...

Rather, that of some of the tracks that I tested, which I had previously encoded from the same source (using the same FLAC 1.2.1 codec), difference to my own ear was indicated to me (and only me) by a probability that was statistically significant.

HOWEVER, I did NOT mean to start some sort of argument as to the means by which I performed the tests or for that matter, anything to do with my testing at all (I probably shouldn't have even mentioned those tests to begin with, it was just for context).

I was just trying to frame a much more general question, pertaining to the difference between two tracks sounding different as opposed to one track sounding better than another...

My apologies if I came across otherwise!

[saratoga]

To my surprise I could tell the difference more often than not.

To clarify, I didn't mean to say I could tell the difference between FLAC 0-8 more often than not...

difference to my own ear was indicated to me (and only me) by a probability that was statistically significant.

Wait, so which is it?

[audioslut512]

To my surprise I could tell the difference more often than not.

To clarify, I didn't mean to say I could tell the difference between FLAC 0-8 more often than not...

difference to my own ear was indicated to me (and only me) by a probability that was statistically significant.

Wait, so which is it?

The ABX tests which I performed were on tracks which were contained within the set: FLAC levels 0-8.

If I performed an ABX test, the files tested were limited to FLAC 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.

That does NOT indicate that I tested ALL levels 0-8.

OF THE TRACKS WHICH I DID TEST, I was able to discern a difference more often than not.

Statistically significant is that which is unlikely to occur by chance.

A statistically significant difference in this case, merely implies that statistical evidence indicates that a discernible difference has a greater probability of existing than it does a probability of not existing.

Whether that difference is due to errors in encoding, playback, or whatever, is entirely irrelevant.

[SiriusB]

Statistically significant is that which is unlikely to occur by chance.

A statistically significant difference in this case, merely implies that statistical evidence indicates that a discernible difference has a greater probability of existing than it does a probability of not existing.

Whether that difference is due to errors in encoding, playback, or whatever, is entirely irrelevant.

If you repeatedly, 'successfully' (>16 trials each, p<0.05) ABXd flac from flac, or flac from .wav, all using the same track, then your flac encoding/decoding is broken, or your ABX test was crap. Seriously. If you understood what you are claiming, you'd know this must be true.

This post has been edited by SiriusB: Nov 12 2007, 08:26