Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - FINISHED |
![]() ![]() |
Public MP3 Listening Test @ 128 kbps - FINISHED |
Dec 14 2008, 19:11
Post
#201
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 18-June 04 Member No.: 14755 |
Just wandered back into HA after a long time (and my system remembered my password).
One thing I note about the "128k" test, is that all encoders other than the low anchor were allowed to average higher than 128k (over the whole sample set), so if reaching 128k for storage capacity/bandwidth costs was required, then they all failed. How they would have compared at 128k ABR, CBR or VBR <= 128k (per sample / all samples) may have played out differently, as they varied from 8.6 to 12.5% over the targer bitrate (average), with greater excursions above and below for particular samples. |
|
|
|
Dec 14 2008, 19:37
Post
#202
|
|
![]() Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 1442 Joined: 11-February 03 From: Vermont Member No.: 4955 |
Just wandered back into HA after a long time (and my system remembered my password). One thing I note about the "128k" test, is that all encoders other than the low anchor were allowed to average higher than 128k (over the whole sample set), To the extent that the samples are selected to be problematic (I don't know if they all were), maybe it's to be expected that they would run higher than the target rate? |
|
|
|
Dec 14 2008, 19:55
Post
#203
|
|
![]() Group: Super Moderator Posts: 9263 Joined: 1-April 04 Member No.: 13167 |
I tried to do something about misleading test titles and Sebastian even seemed like he was going to go along with it:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=421117 ...oh well! -------------------- Everything sounds the same until it is proven otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Dec 14 2008, 20:55
Post
#204
|
|
![]() LAME developer Group: Developer Posts: 761 Joined: 22-September 01 Member No.: 5 |
@Matth:
You may want to read the paragraph "Is it normal that the bitrate is very high on some samples (even 228 kbps)?" from the introduction to the listening test. |
|
|
|
Feb 2 2009, 17:07
Post
#205
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 2-February 09 Member No.: 66537 |
Hi to everybody and sorry for my poor english.
This is my first message to this fourm so I'll try to not to be so unpolite but there is something in this results that surprised me. I worked as biostatistician for 5 years and I cannot understand why all the 95% confidence intervals are equal. it is supposed that the 95% error depends on sample size (identical for all the inner grooup) ande the x-mean dispersion. So if there are different appreciations (1 to 5 range) there will be different confidence intervals. May be there is something I could not achieve And, thank you for this incredible forum (a long time reading until today). |
|
|
|
Jun 25 2011, 08:29
Post
#206
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 73 Joined: 22-December 05 Member No.: 26571 |
hi,
I would like having a look to the results but this link is dead : http://www.listening-tests.info/mp3-128-1/results.htm any idea to get those results ? thanks edit : found ! sorry http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio.org/s...8-1/results.htm This post has been edited by zorba: Jun 25 2011, 08:33 |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd May 2013 - 07:19 |