Thread: Listening tests
View Single Post
Old 09 August 2005, 06:41 pm   #10
xmixahlx
Musepack developer
 
xmixahlx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: seattle, washington usa
Posts: 111
Send a message via ICQ to xmixahlx
Default

i have read this thread.

you aren't grasping (1) how listening tests work - e.g. roberto's listening tests (2) how pure VBR codecs work (3) how musepack bitrate management works.

(1) ^^ see previous post.

in addition: to compare LAME VBR @128 and musepack VBR @128, a wide range of real music is used to tune the encoder to an acceptable parameter, then this parameter is used during the test.

this is important for you: musepack is able to use greater bits in problem samples more efficiently than other codecs (the situation is similar to ogg vorbis and AAC)

(2) pure vbr codecs use a quality scale and throw more bits at harder to encode music. this does not mean that the music that uses less kbps is inferior compression within the same quality scale. it is more of the opposite, as a higher quality setting allows for the harder-to-encode areas of the source to be encoded at a higher bitrate.

(3) musepack bitrate management utilizes a dynamic scale, and is not limited to e.g. LAME's bitrate management, making it a more effecient encoder

what i really would like to see, is you conduct a listening test highlighting only the SIMPLEST music to encode, like, lets say silence - and we will know for sure the true silence encoding champ!


later
__________________
-xmixahlx, the one they call "mike"
http://xmixahlx.com -|- http://rarewares.org
xmixahlx is offline   Reply With Quote