heise.de Forum

As much as I like heise.de's printed products, their forum is one of the worst I've ever seen.

We all know that lower bitrates are easier to distinguish but that doesn't render anything invalid - and it really, really doesn't mean other tests of Roberto are invalid. That's why I honestly don't like the title you chose for your post.

That guy's comment is pretty unqualified and he doesn't offer anything to proof his point. Don't give him more attention than he deserves.

Well, can some Mod please change the topic please ?

My germans a little rusty. Anyone care to let the english speakers know what's being said?

Oh sorry I forgot. He claims without using a double blind test the results are pretty useless.

a real real rough translation, it's late...

"The Test wasn't doubleblind, so there is practically no relevance. In real life, you'll prolly start to hear significant differences btw different mp3-encoders at much lower bitrates than 128 kbit/s and prior to that, no statement about quality makes any sense.
that's what [other?] doubleblindtests tell us."

edit:uhm... did I get it right that YOU Benjamin wrote the above statement, or did I get something wrong?

Robertos test with ABC/HR *ARE* double-blind.

Unless you want to argue the ABC/HR software itself is biasing the tests, which makes no sense at all.

(And I'd like to see those tests that show opposite results that he claims to have)

I gave him the link to the test yes, but thats all

Edit: ^


Looks like Benjamin was quoted by alkalamba.

Or an even rougher one: Babelfish automated translation.

I understood the german better.

Thanks for the translation Digga!

Had a good laugh at that "translation"? Then here's my own attempt at it.

Because quality matters shit to them (i.e. about the thread's original topic 'Why FhG and not LAME in Microsoft's new WMP10?')
(alkalamba's opinion on Roberto's 128 kbps MP3 listening test) The test was not double blind, so in practice it is not authoritative. In reality, one should only be able to discern between various MP3 codecs at significantly lower bitrates than 128 kbps, and therefore, assessing quality beforehand (prejudice about quality) is senseless. That's what double blind tests have laid down, anyhow.

As the average HA reader will be able to tell from a shallow statement like the above, and as t.g.deck has already rightly so said, this alkalamba guy shouldn't be given any more exposure than he's already getting.

Me too. It's amazing what crappy translations Babelfish-and-the-like are still producing, and getting away with, in the 21st century.

ah, o.k.

not a problem it was a very humble and sloppy try anyway.

ROTFL