Thread: Listening tests
View Single Post
Old 10 August 2005, 07:00 am   #15
guruboolez
Member
 
guruboolez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Strasbourg (France)
Posts: 13
Default

Pieroxy asked in this thread:
Quote:
Naturally, MPC sounds better in these parts, but what of the other parts? the parts where LAME would allocate 128kbps and MPC only 110kbps?
Giving an element of answer to a question is really off-topic?

Shy>
Quote:
I don't see how Musepack's quality was "unusually lower" with any sample either.
To help you: take another look on this graph:
MPC is worse than atrac3, WMA, vorbis and AAC. Bitrate droped to ~90 kbps.

Quote:
. And that too doesn't mean much since the overall performance is what matters in the end.
You missed the point. Of course MPC overall results are good, if not excellent. But what asked pieroxy, and before him many people, is what would be the performance with another samples, including more samples with bitrate < 128 kbps.

Quote:
Also, taking those two results out of the rest means very little to anyone if they can't see the rest.
As developer, I suppose that you might be more interested by "exceptions" (aka problem sample) than overall results, no? Users should also be aware about these possible problems occuring with MPC (or any other format), and not only be enlighted about positive listening tests.
Then, "the rest [of the test]" (as you said) is not necessary representative of the kind of music people are listening to. People listening to classical music for example won't consider Debussy.wav as something exceptional. I've tested MPC --radio with classical music only long time ago (here), and MPC performance was:
- average for overall results
- bad with some samples
guruboolez is offline   Reply With Quote