Music / Video for comparing speakers?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by orangpelupa, Apr 18, 2015.

  1. suryad

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,479
    Likes Received:
    16
    I'm later to the party but Fleetwood Mac the album Rumours, Michael Jackson Thriller, Pink Floyd Pulse , Ledisi Vaya con Dios, Diana Krall etc are cds I pop in to see what a stereo can do. Blues works as well and of course Metallica though not all albums. I recently got a stereo set up and have been trying to expand my musical tastes. Also hugely matters what kind of room you are listening to music in.
     
  2. pascal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    1,968
    Likes Received:
    221
    Location:
    Brasil
    Test with any music but use quality FLAC, WAV, etc...

    Some simple recomendations to test.
    for vocals:
    the_treblemakers-trebles_finals
    the_barden_bellas-bellas_finals
    (pitch perfect soundtrack)

    rock: Enter Sandman (Metalica)

    more music:
    Simple Minds - Don't You (Forget About Me)
    Coldplay - Viva La Vida
    Eric Clapton - Tears In Heaven
    Bossa-n-Roses - Banda Do Soul - Sweet Child Of Mine (Feat. Natascha)

    Has your headphones neodymium magnets?
    Good test
     
  3. Putas

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    354
    Boredoms often use whole range nicely
     
  4. Arwin

    Arwin Now Officially a Top 10 Poster
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2006
    Messages:
    18,761
    Likes Received:
    2,639
    Location:
    Maastricht, The Netherlands
    @pascal: this one?



    Interesting choice of cover-a... music. ;)
     
  5. Albuquerque

    Albuquerque Red-headed step child
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,308
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Location:
    35.1415,-90.056
    If you can find them (Amazon!), Telarc Digital produced a number of fantastically mastered CD's full of classical tracks, a number of them are Sci-Fi themed and are thoroughly enjoyable for anyone who loves classic sci fi movies and TV shows.

    There's a SoundCloud version of Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathrustra, which is bitchin for extremely wide dynamic range classical presentation. One of my Telarc Digital discs has this track too, the venerable "Star Tracks" album. Example (not to be considered high quality):


    Also, the "Imperial March" theme from Star Wars is fantastic for audio system abuse.
     
  6. pascal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    1,968
    Likes Received:
    221
    Location:
    Brasil
    Yes, this one.
    But try a higher quality Flac or wav :)
    It improves a lot with better sound.
     
  7. entity279

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,332
    Likes Received:
    500
    Location:
    Romania
    There are no 'hich quality' wav or flac. All lossless formats such as flac sound identical to the source (pcm, cd..). The only difference between a 800kps and 600kps flac is the file size (assuming the encoder can of course produce both such versions).
     
  8. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    How come I can't tell the difference between MP3 160Kbps and FLAC? The difference in file size is massive but it all sounds the same to me and my hearing is good.

    As for good music to test speakers with, I like the album Ágætis byrjun by Sigur Ros. Actually pretty much all of their albums are good for this.
     
  9. Albuquerque

    Albuquerque Red-headed step child
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,308
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Location:
    35.1415,-90.056
    Because, as has been conclusively shown in multiple, properly conducted double-blind or ABX tests, the psycho-acoustic modelling of modern high quality MP3 encoders will typically result in an audio presentation where the difference between "lossless" and "compressed" is not humanly discernible.

    The most famous, and likely first of these tests, was done by the German magazine c't back in 2000; a link to the original along with a translated version of the article can be found here: http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=27324

    A more recent one from McGill University, finding (with MP3's encoded at 256k-320kbps rates) the audio samples could not be reliably detected as different from the source CD media: http://www.music.mcgill.ca/~hockman/documents/Pras_presentation2009.pdf

    There are others, if you dig, but they all end up with the same conclusion: in a properly conducted test, you aren't going to tell the difference. The only caveat to this general result pattern is related to people with abnormalities in their hearing. The c't test actually has a good example of this - one of the "more successful" folks in picking out compressed audio (who wasn't very successful, but at least was moreso than others) had lost all hearing above 8KHz in one ear. This allowed him to discern certain flare to specific types of musical tracks when compressed, which is normally not something that a properly functioning set of ears would pick up on.
     
    #29 Albuquerque, Jul 13, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2015
    Grall likes this.
  10. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    That confirms something I've suspected for a long time then. Thanks!
     
  11. Bludd

    Bludd Experiencing A Significant Gravitas Shortfall
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    3,793
    Likes Received:
    1,475
    Location:
    Funny, It Worked Last Time...
    #31 Bludd, Jul 14, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2015
  12. entity279

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,332
    Likes Received:
    500
    Location:
    Romania
    AFAIK as well, you need very good equipment AND a very well chosen audio material to be able to tell the difference between an >= 160 kbps mp3 and a loseless version of it.

    OTOH, loseless formats are still very much suited for storing an audio collection. As a baseline for converting to various lossy formats on various (portable) devices
     
  13. Bludd

    Bludd Experiencing A Significant Gravitas Shortfall
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    3,793
    Likes Received:
    1,475
    Location:
    Funny, It Worked Last Time...
    Did you read the article from 2000 that Albuquerque linked to? They did what you said and they couldn't distinguish the high-bitrate MP3 from the CD-audio.
     
  14. entity279

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,332
    Likes Received:
    500
    Location:
    Romania
    I've read quite a few of such articles over time, so couldn't be bothered this once.

    Sorry if what I said could be misunderstood - I actually agree to the conclusions you mentioned. Additionally, I think I remember there were a few specially concieved audio tracks in which you could tell the difference. Nothing you can ever buy at a record store though.
     
  15. Albuquerque

    Albuquerque Red-headed step child
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,308
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Location:
    35.1415,-90.056
    This was actually the context of the 2013 McGill research; they used multiple encoding bitrates to see where the rolloff point really hits home. They selected a wide range of source audio samples (to your point, some sounds are more likely to exhibit problems than others) and also used a properly controlled studio environment / studio-level equipment to conduct the test. Arguably, an even better place to detect the subtle changes when compared to the original c't article.

    The 2013 research showed that, below 256kbps, several participants could detect the compressed version in a statistically meaningful way. Once the encoding rate hit 256kbps it was a wash, and strangely enough at 320kbps, the compressed version was actually the preferred one -- although not in a statistically meaningful way either.
     
    #35 Albuquerque, Jul 14, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2015
    tuna likes this.
  16. zed

    zed
    Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,139
    you need good listening equipment, i.e. not beats headphones

    You might wanna reread the conclusion
    I havent tested but are 99% sure I couldnt tell and if I could the difference will be extremely minor, I might have a listen later
     
  17. homerdog

    homerdog donator of the year
    Legend Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    6,294
    Likes Received:
    1,075
    Location:
    still camping with a mauler
    I have Logitech G930 headset, but even on much better setups I've never been able to reliably tell a good MP3 from a CD. I am not worthy :(
     
  18. Albuquerque

    Albuquerque Red-headed step child
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,308
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Location:
    35.1415,-90.056
    That result isn't quite what you make it out to be...

    They could tell a difference, the problem is that they started choosing the compressed sample. Go ahead, read the result, very specifically the bar graphs where they show which groups (professional vs "amateur") and which selections they chose. Page 17 to be precise, notice that the CD/320 bargraphs for sound engineers actually dips below 50% for both lines -- this means they were choosing the compressed file playback, not the "true" file playback.

    Not what you might naively expect, but it makes logical sense: the psycho-acoustic model is specifically tuned to sound good to human hearing. It makes sense that the compressed version actually ends up being more pleasant to the ear, even if doing so is "untrue" to the source.
     
    Grall likes this.
  19. zed

    zed
    Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,139
    (both fall in the non significant range i.e. chance) And notice on the same graph the musicians prefered the CD over the 320kps by quite a bit more. i.e. in significant range. :)
    I was just saying the conclusion disagree's with you

    I'll look into this some more later busy ATM organzing a holiday, see if theres further studies
    found this though from google
    http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/mp3-sound-quality-test-128-320/
    bang <1 sec I made my choice (it was night and day to day) & my hearings pretty bad I thought, though I do record music
     
  20. Albuquerque

    Albuquerque Red-headed step child
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    4,308
    Likes Received:
    1,098
    Location:
    35.1415,-90.056
    And yet the same group got the 256kbps utterly wrong (more than they got the 320kbps right.)

    The difference is discernable under very specific circumstances, but not in the way you insinuate.

    And choosing between 128kbps and 320kbps really isn't the same conversation.
     
    orangpelupa likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...