|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
|
|
Computer Audio Asylum Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Thanks posted by Ryelands on March 3, 2010 at 04:14:22:
*** The story is often told the other way round - it's the "psychic" who reads the body language of the subject :>) ***Well, it's the subject's "psychic" ability that was being tested. The experimenter knew what the answers were, and was subconsciously conveying the answers through body language to "successful" subjects.
The M&M paper is interesting, but wasn't the paper I was thinking of.
My memory is terrible these days, and it may well have been the paper, I'll have to look around to see if I can still find it.
I agree that the M&M paper is kind of ... "interesting" reading (sarcasm hat on).
MP3 quality varies by encoder as well as bit depth. A proper MP3 vs lossless test will require you to encode everything yourself using a known encoder, rather than casual comparisons of stuff downloaded from the internet. I personally find great difficulty in distinguishing between MP3 and CD at bitrates above 240 kbps, below that yes it is possible.
It's possible to train the ear to recognise lossy artefacts - for MP3 just listen very carefully to the high frequencies for signs of "phasing." For Ogg Vorbis it's ringing, for WMA it's an increase in low level noise and some "flattening" of the dynamics. As you up the bitrates, these artefacts become less and less and eventually there are no obvious clues.
Edits: 03/03/10
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Thanks - Christine Tham 10:16:33 03/03/10 (3)
- RE: Thanks - Tony Lauck 12:36:53 03/03/10 (2)
- Thanks Tony for the link to the paper (nt) - Christine Tham 14:26:50 03/03/10 (0)
- RE: Thanks - Ryelands 13:03:56 03/03/10 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
