3 ms·

The guy who created the Vorbis codec explains why this really isn't the case and why high sampling rates with ultrasonics actually are bad for playback quality.

by apecat 6y ago

The guy who created the Vorbis codec explains why this really isn't the case and why high sampling rates with ultrasonics actually are bad for playback quality. https://web.archive.org/web/20120306150922/https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html https://web.archive.org/web/20120306150922/https://people.xi... I would really encourage blind testing of one's assumptions about audio quality. Foobar2000 has this super nice ABX plugin that can handle automatic conversation to different codecs and or PCM sampling rates and depth from lossless sources. https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx I can personally recognize full bitrate mp3 (this ancient codec maxes out at 320 kbps where it still sounds colored). This is a well-made pre-configured test https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/... But move on to anything more modern than mp3, such as Apple's AAC encoder (there's a ton of bad AAC encoders out there) or Vorbis with VBR settings averaging at 256-320 kbps. You'll find it very hard to spot the lossy encodes in a blind test. Opus is astonishingly good at even lower bitrates.

apecat 6y ago
Actually, here's an online ABX blind test set with several modern codecs at high bitrates, as well as the bad old mp3 garbage that ruined the reputation of lossy compression. I really challenge you to reliably detect the lossy sample in the tests for Apple iTunes AAC ~256 kbps and Spotify high quality. http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html
bayindirh 6y ago
> The guy who created the Vorbis codec explains why this really isn't the case and why high sampling rates with ultrasonics actually are bad for playback quality. I'll take a look to it, thanks for the link. That sounds interesting. > I would really encourage blind testing of one's assumptions about audio quality. I'd gladly take an ABX test and stand corrected. digital feed's ABX test is pretty good but needs some quiet time to do it correctly. I'll try to find some time to take it. I tried but, it's not good when you don't have time. > I can personally recognize full bitrate mp3. It's possible to recognize some equipment (software or hardware) by ear because of its distinctive sound dynamics. I've listened a limited set of stuff (amplifiers, headphones, CD players, etc.) and can recognize each of them by ear. I think starting early and playing some instruments in groups help with ear training. > But move on to anything more modern than mp3, such as Apple's AAC encoder... The latest generation of encoders sound extremely transparent. You're right about it. It's a good thing actually. I'm not grumpy about not being able to brag about identifying the codec of the file I'm listening to. I just want to hear enjoyable, detailed, high resolution music. If my ears and brain are happy about what they're hearing, I'm happy.

by apecat 6y ago

apecat 6y ago

Actually, here's an online ABX blind test set with several modern codecs at high bitrates, as well as the bad old mp3 garbage that ruined the reputation of lossy compression. I really challenge you to reliably detect the lossy sample in the tests for Apple iTunes AAC ~256 kbps and Spotify high quality. http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html http://abx.digitalfeed.net/list.html

bayindirh 6y ago

> The guy who created the Vorbis codec explains why this really isn't the case and why high sampling rates with ultrasonics actually are bad for playback quality. I'll take a look to it, thanks for the link. That sounds interesting. > I would really encourage blind testing of one's assumptions about audio quality. I'd gladly take an ABX test and stand corrected. digital feed's ABX test is pretty good but needs some quiet time to do it correctly. I'll try to find some time to take it. I tried but, it's not good when you don't have time. > I can personally recognize full bitrate mp3. It's possible to recognize some equipment (software or hardware) by ear because of its distinctive sound dynamics. I've listened a limited set of stuff (amplifiers, headphones, CD players, etc.) and can recognize each of them by ear. I think starting early and playing some instruments in groups help with ear training. > But move on to anything more modern than mp3, such as Apple's AAC encoder... The latest generation of encoders sound extremely transparent. You're right about it. It's a good thing actually. I'm not grumpy about not being able to brag about identifying the codec of the file I'm listening to. I just want to hear enjoyable, detailed, high resolution music. If my ears and brain are happy about what they're hearing, I'm happy.