Damn, I suck. I think the D is a bit buggy, but idk.
Humans generally can hear up to 20 kHz. With modern encoders, higher frequencies are cut first. You can see this by looking at spectrograms and it's a good way of checking for transcodes because you can easily see if the frequency range is too low for the bitrate.Corin wrote:
It's pretty easy.
Just listen to the highs freq shit, anything lower than 320Kbps gets snubbed slightly and sounds more... flat I guess.
Can't think of the word.
pretty much thisIppE wrote:
Mozaik Role is the only one where MP3 encoding has real troubles making it sound transparent at bitrates lower than 320kbps, the rest is pretty bass heavy or just not that hard on the encoder to begin with...
InterestingFrizz925 wrote:
lolaudiophiles
This is also worth a try though http://www.klippel.de/listeningtest/lt/
Thank youEphemeral wrote:
pretty much thisIppE wrote:
Mozaik Role is the only one where MP3 encoding has real troubles making it sound transparent at bitrates lower than 320kbps, the rest is pretty bass heavy or just not that hard on the encoder to begin with...
do this with orchestral/instrumental music and you will absolutely hear a difference between all three with ease even through laptop speakers
good little app though
Does this mean that songs with lower frequency have less audible loss than songs with higher frequency? Or just the opposite thing? Or neither? (I dunno )Jarby wrote:
I'll post here later when my house is quieter. My dad is using power tools and my washing machine is loud as fuck too.Humans generally can hear up to 20 kHz. With modern encoders, higher frequencies are cut first. You can see this by looking at spectrograms and it's a good way of checking for transcodes because you can easily see if the frequency range is too low for the bitrate.Corin wrote:
It's pretty easy.
Just listen to the highs freq shit, anything lower than 320Kbps gets snubbed slightly and sounds more... flat I guess.
Can't think of the word.
The point of this test is to decide if I should re-encode my 320Kbps files to a lower bitrate or not. So I encoded the other files from the 320 oneJarby wrote:
Also, I'm wondering if you encoded all of these from a lossless source or did them all from the 320 you grabbed.
YOU! Y U every time D:?JFRN wrote:
interesting, i will test it on my computer.
and, good coding on Game Maker !
Details in the treble end are lost as bitrate declines, yes. This usually doesn't matter as much for songs with unimportant, simple and quiet parts in that area.kikones34 wrote:
Does this mean that songs with lower frequency have less audible loss than songs with higher frequency? Or just the opposite thing? Or neither? (I dunno )
...Ah well whatever~kikones34 wrote:
if the human ear can really tell the difference
LAME has the default frequency cutoff at 19.5 kHz so it can be heard with good enough equipment depending on ~stuff~ like how the song was mastered etc.Jarby wrote:
Humans generally can hear up to 20 kHz. With modern encoders, higher frequencies are cut first. You can see this by looking at spectrograms and it's a good way of checking for transcodes because you can easily see if the frequency range is too low for the bitrate.
What? Cutoff depends on bitrate.IppE wrote:
LAME has the default frequency cutoff at 19.5 kHz so it can be heard with good enough equipment depending on ~stuff~ like how the song was mastered etc.Jarby wrote:
Humans generally can hear up to 20 kHz. With modern encoders, higher frequencies are cut first. You can see this by looking at spectrograms and it's a good way of checking for transcodes because you can easily see if the frequency range is too low for the bitrate.
And of course if your ear hears it to begin with.
I checked at least a couple of the 320s and the spectrograms seem appropriate for what it's worth.peppy wrote:
A lot of the songs used for testing were noticeably compressed (as in the frequency range) to the point that encoding at 192kbit (or even 128kbit to a lesser extent) is transparent – that is, indistinguishable to a human. I had trouble distinguishing most of them apart as a result. In fact, a lot of the samples felt like they were encoded from a low quality original encode or rip (was this the case, possibly?). It would make more sense if you substantiated your original rip sources as being from original CDs you own.
The purpose of this test was not to test the quality difference when encoding from a lossless source, but to test the quality difference when re-encoding from a 320Kbps MP3 source. (I should've specified this in the original post, maybe )peppy wrote:
A lot of the songs used for testing were noticeably compressed (as in the frequency range) to the point that encoding at 192kbit (or even 128kbit to a lesser extent) is transparent – that is, indistinguishable to a human. I had trouble distinguishing most of them apart as a result. In fact, a lot of the samples felt like they were encoded from a low quality original encode or rip (was this the case, possibly?). It would make more sense if you substantiated your original rip sources as being from original CDs you own.
And:Nyquill wrote:
I always only get 320 right lmao
So.. Does this really make any sense?Remi_Scarlet wrote:
128 is easy to tell but between 192 and 320... Eh. I can't hear enough of a difference for me to care. Besides, I'll be way too focused on hitting all the notes while playing than just listening to the music.
You caught me D;bagnz0r wrote:
<DarkScenario>
I bet this guy pre-fucked up every song at 64kbps and re-encoded it at higher bitrates so that you fail.
</DarkScenario>
256 GB is hardly enough to maintain my 400+ collection of albums and still be able to keep tremendous amount of projects.Kitsunemimi wrote:
I'm using an SSD too but I stick with lossless FLAC :3
(of course I wouldn't say I have a ridiculous amount of music as of this point but... meh )
It's already stated that MP3 compression causes frequency cutoff on highest frequencies in previous posts.asl97 wrote:
i can heard a high flute like sound in Mozaik Role, it sound more clearly in the higher bit-rate, did anyone hear it too?
something high in unbreakable and the one with higher bit-rate in express emotion is clearer.