MP3 or not

[Tom172]

Can you tell the difference between the quality of the audio samples?

Take the test twice and post your results.


http://mp3ornot.com/index.php

Headphones are recommended.


My result:

 

[HeffeD]

No Headphones.

As a recording engineer, I've done many listening tests with .mp3's. (I hate them)

 

[Tom172]

I was really just guessing. Not sure if I could actually tell the difference. Probably better tests out there, but this is just one that I remembered.

 

[jamescv7]

For me its like literally same with 320 and 128 kbps.

Well managed to make a 3 test and got a fair percentage.

 

[MetalShaun]

Decent head phones or speakers will help you out with this. HeffeD I bet you just keep doing it till you got 6 in a row then posted the results . I know a fair bit about music and I have studied music technology at college and I am finding it quite difficult to distinguish.

EDIT: Id like to add i have probably damaged by hearing by bashing cymbals in it for 8 years.

 

[jamescv7]

In this case, its difficult to make a guess since a good hearing skills is needed to distinguished the difference.

 

[MetalShaun]

After a bit of practice I managed to get 5 in a row right before getting one wrong.

 

[HeffeD]

HeffeD I bet you just keep doing it till you got 6 in a row then posted the results . I know a fair bit about music and I have studied music technology at college and I am finding it quite difficult to distinguish.

Nope. I wasn't even using high-end computer speakers...

Since my ears were the way I made my living for many years, they're fairly well-trained.

With .mp3's, there are some pretty obvious differences at lower bit-rates if you know what to listen for. It's all about depth of field and high frequencies. The lower the bit-rate, the narrower the perceived stereo spread will be. The spacious sound derived from effects such as reverb or chorusing will be greatly reduced, (Due to LSB's being chopped off) making things sound less 'open'. (For want of a better term... Trying to describe the way something sounds is pretty subjective) Also particularly affected are high frequency instruments such as cymbals or the violin. The lower the bit-rate, noticeable 'wavering' or choppiness can be heard in suspended notes. Cymbals are particularly sibilant or 'splatty/crunchy' (Again with poor attempts to describe audio...) at lower bit-rates.

If you really want to utilize low bit-rates like 128 kbps (likely for space saving reasons) I would recommend encoding to .mpc files using the Musepack codec. It sounds much better than an .mp3 at the same bit-rate. Basically, a 128 kbps .mpc file is indiscernible from a 320 kbps .mp3 file.

Most good media players can play .mpc files. (Note that iTunes isn't a good media player...) I personally use Foobar2000, but you can find a list of compatible players here. Musepack Compatible Players.

Edit: As an audio guy, it's always amused me that people consistently strive for higher quality visuals, (HDTV, BluRay) yet are completely content to listen to 128 kbps .mp3's. :s

 

[Littlebits]

I only took 4 tests then the site keep looping back to the first test each time.
Therefore I couldn't get an accurate score.

It all depends on which type of music that you listen too if any different can be detected.

Music with low base tones can be detected easily because the base tones blur on 128kbps. Music with high pitch treble also can be distinguished. However many mp3's can't be easily noticed and the difference can be so small that most people wouldn't know the difference.

I usually rip my music into 320kbps just in case because before some of my music turned out to be poor quality using 128kbps.

Thanks.

 

[HeffeD]

It all depends on which type of music that you listen too if any different can be detected.

True. It's actually much easier to tell the difference with orchestral music than with rock.

Music with low base tones can be detected easily because the base tones blur on 128kbps.

Not necessarily due to low bit-rates. Bass is mono in layer 3 compression schemes. This is probably one of the biggest space saving tricks. Since bass is non-directional, (which is why you can place your sub-woofer anywhere in your listening room) making the blanket conclusion that there is no reason for stereo information in the lower frequencies is a safe bet when it comes to deciding which portions of the music to chop out.

 

[Valentin N]

handy info how do I add the musepack in foobar2000?

It's better to have a separate disk where only music and such stuff are in.

 

[Littlebits]

It all depends on which type of music that you listen too if any different can be detected.

True. It's actually much easier to tell the difference with orchestral music than with rock.

Music with low base tones can be detected easily because the base tones blur on 128kbps.

Not necessarily due to low bit-rates. Bass is mono in layer 3 compression schemes. This is probably one of the biggest space saving tricks. Since bass is non-directional, (which is why you can place your sub-woofer anywhere in your listening room) making the blanket conclusion that there is no reason for stereo information in the lower frequencies is a safe bet when it comes to deciding which portions of the music to chop out.

It depends on your speaker setup.
On my computer which I use as my stereo, I have 5 speakers.
2 front 2.0-channel, 2 back 2.1-channel and one base sub-woofer.

The 4 speakers back and front are combo speakers which include base, treble, surround sound,etc.

On some mp3's ripped in 128kbps, the base blurs on either the front 2 or back 2 speakers or sometimes there is no base at all in either the front 2 or back 2 speakers only the sub-woofer has the base. Sometimes I can hear static instead of base on one or more of the speakers.

It makes the music sound very poor. Kind of like listening to AM Radio.

Could also be related to my Realtek sound card.

Thanks.

 

[HeffeD]

handy info how do I add the musepack in foobar2000?

For encoding or decoding?

Decoding is built-in and automatic. Nothing needs to be done in order for Foobar2000 to read .mpc files.

To encode, if you wish to rip with Foobar2000, you can just place the encoder in the main Foobar folder and the converter component will be able to find it. Then you can just use the convert menu to change the output format to .mpc and set the converter options.

For ripping though, I prefer to use Exact Audio Copy due to its read error correction. (Often called a secure rip) It can also check the AccurateRip database to help determine if your rip is a 100% accurate digital copy.

EAC can be a bit daunting to set up, but once done, it's easy to use. There are various guides on setup, such as List of recommended MPC settings - Hydrogenaudio Forums, and The ESSENTIAL Ripping Guide for EAC. The first link is just how to set up the .mpc encoder, and the second is just a more general EAC usage guide.

 

[MetalShaun]

With .mp3's, there are some pretty obvious differences at lower bit-rates if you know what to listen for. It's all about depth of field and high frequencies. The lower the bit-rate, the narrower the perceived stereo spread will be. The spacious sound derived from effects such as reverb or chorusing will be greatly reduced, (Due to LSB's being chopped off) making things sound less 'open'. (For want of a better term... Trying to describe the way something sounds is pretty subjective) Also particularly affected are high frequency instruments such as cymbals or the violin. The lower the bit-rate, noticeable 'wavering' or choppiness can be heard in suspended notes. Cymbals are particularly sibilant or 'splatty/crunchy' (Again with poor attempts to describe audio...) at lower bit-rates.

Cymbals and vocals were what I was mainly trying to pick out, but it's still very difficult.

Edit: As an audio guy, it's always amused me that people consistently strive for higher quality visuals, (HDTV, BluRay) yet are completely content to listen to 128 kbps .mp3's. :s

A lot of my CDs are ripped at 96kps :exclamation: because I had to squeeze them onto an 8GB Mp3 player. Now I have a 32gb i might re rip them all a lot higher. I have found though that Sony mp3 players really do make tracks sound much better though. OT but also I find home cinema systems are much better IMO for music listening over a simple high wattage 2 way stereo.

 

[HeffeD]

Could also be related to my Realtek sound card.

Yep. If you're playing a stereo file through four speakers, you're going to have imaging issues. (not including the sub obviously, as it doesn't affect the imaging) I don't know how you have your sound card configured, but it may even be trying to derive multi-channel information from a two-channel source, (*Pro-Logic) or applying a pseudo-surround DSP algorithm.

* It's kind of like listening to a CD through a Pro-Logic decoder. It's going to be trying to send the mono signals through the center speaker, stereo information through the front left and right speakers, and ambiance (reverb and other effects) through the surrounds. Depending on the source music, this can either sound like a nice sort of pseudo-surround sound, or a pile of crap.

 

[MetalShaun]

Could also be related to my Realtek sound card.

Yep. If you're playing a stereo file through four speakers, you're going to have imaging issues. (not including the sub obviously, as it doesn't affect the imaging) I don't know how you have your sound card configured, but it may even be trying to derive multi-channel information from a two-channel source, (*Pro-Logic) or applying a pseudo-surround DSP algorithm.

* It's kind of like listening to a CD through a Pro-Logic decoder. It's going to be trying to send the mono signals through the center speaker, stereo information through the front left and right speakers, and ambiance (reverb and other effects) through the surrounds. Depending on the source music, this can either sound like a nice sort of pseudo-surround sound, or a pile of crap.

What I have always found Confusing is when using my PC or PS3 to play audio though my home cinema system is it best to leave my PC and PS3 in 2 channel mode, and let my Amplifier split the signal up into 5.1, or is it best to have both the PC/PS3 and amplifier in 5.1 speaker mode???

 

[HeffeD]

If you mean set your PC/game console on stereo and your receiver on 5.1, no, you'll want to be sending multi-channel information, not stereo.

The 5.1 decoder in your receiver is likely going to do a better job of decoding than your PC or game console, and the longer the signal stays digital, the better. If you have S/PDIF or optical connections between these components and your receiver, I would use that.

 

[Ink]

Whilst I was search for a config thread, I found this and gave it a go. 1st time luck without headphones.

 

[malbky]

I download only 320KBps MP3s or use MP4