There is an article currently on digg where someone has conducted a test of AAC vs the Original. Actually I'm not even sure about that, it's unclear whether it's 128kbps AAC vs the original or 128k vs 256. Predictably the output is pretty much statistically invalid 50/50 either side over 4 songs..
http://digg.com/apple/Can_you_tell_128kbps...l_Take_the_test
I cringe when i read the comments...
Full Version: (flawed) AAC listening test on digg
QUOTE
Sanitarium 3 hours ago
[below viewing threshold, hide comment] - 11 diggs
Did they download the 256kbps AAC file, and then compress it to 128kbps? Or did they have the lossless file and encode both from the same file?
Lossy -> Lossy encoding should be a crime.
Take a look at the score.
Ignorance is bliss.
QUOTE(...Just Elliott @ Apr 11 2007, 08:25) 
QUOTE
Sanitarium 3 hours ago
[below viewing threshold, hide comment] - 11 diggs
Did they download the 256kbps AAC file, and then compress it to 128kbps? Or did they have the lossless file and encode both from the same file?
Lossy -> Lossy encoding should be a crime.
Take a look at the score.
Yes, no wonder he was dugg down. Whatever else the OP did he could not have "download[ed] the 256kbps AAC file" since those files are not on sale yet. Moreover, the OP had already said:
QUOTE
... but I wondered how many people could even tell 128kbps encodes from the originals
And, when you visit his link, you find by "the orginals" he means "the music when encoded to a lossless format".
Reason #24159155 to avoid Digg at all costs. Seriously, guys, every time I've gone there I've felt dirty. And I still read Slashdot!
QUOTE(Axon @ Apr 11 2007, 16:43)
Reason #24159155 to avoid Digg at all costs.
you're about a few million digits short.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.