I don't have golden ears.
I just try with Sennheiser MX500.
I am sorry. I just want to discuss it with you.
Please turn to #5 of this post.
Full Version: aps VS api (CBR320), in 3.96.1, which is better?
I have to warn you you are violating the terms of service number 8,
QUOTE
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims. Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings. Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.
QUOTE(srgfyl @ Jul 30 2004, 11:48 PM)
I don't have golden ears.
I just try with Sennheiser MX500.
And I found 3.96.1 aps is better then 3.90.3 aps.
I just try with Sennheiser MX500.
And I found 3.96.1 aps is better then 3.90.3 aps.
too vague. did you do blind listening tests? what sample did you use? how are the results different?
What you claim in your title (e.g., aps vs api & "I sometimes find aps better) isn't even logical. Alt-preset insane uses all 320kbps frames, which is the maximum possible with MP3. If --aps needs lots of bits, the best it can do is 320kbps as well. So, at the very best, --preset standard will sound exactly like --alt-preset insane. Sometimes the VBR model goofs and doesn't allocate enough bits, and in those cases, --preset insane has the potential to sound better, at least in theory. However, such cases are rare; besides, most things that cause problems with --aps won't improve all that much (if even at all) with --preset insane due to MP3's format flaws (short blocks being too long, etc).
I am sorry. I am sorry for the tone I used.
In the fact, I were not giving a result. I just want to discuss it with you.
And I am poor in english, so i am in lack of expressing myself.
However, I love music, I love here.
I did ABX with foobar2000 0.8.2.
The sample I used is a rock and roll, named Endless Rain by X-Japan.
I can differentiate 3.96.1 aps and 3.90.3 aps, and I like 3.96.1 aps.
The sample is copied from CD by EAC 0.95 pb5 in Secure Mode.
And the track quality is 100%.
In the fact, I were not giving a result. I just want to discuss it with you.
And I am poor in english, so i am in lack of expressing myself.
However, I love music, I love here.
I did ABX with foobar2000 0.8.2.
The sample I used is a rock and roll, named Endless Rain by X-Japan.
I can differentiate 3.96.1 aps and 3.90.3 aps, and I like 3.96.1 aps.
The sample is copied from CD by EAC 0.95 pb5 in Secure Mode.
And the track quality is 100%.
And, I am sorry for the subtitle.
But I don't know how to edit it.
Is it enable to edit?
This is my first post.
But I don't know how to edit it.
Is it enable to edit?
This is my first post.
srgfyl, It would be very helpful if you could provide a small lossless sample (.flac is mostly preferred, this could be uploaded to the uploads section of the forum) of the file in question.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.