garym wrote: > seems clear that you can distinguish well with this track. But you > yourself have noted why this might be the case for this particular > track. There have always been problem tracks that people can tell > differences in. And by "problem track" I just mean a track with > something unusual that makes it easy to tell or with harpsichords, etc.. > This is why testing with real music, multiple tracks, and multiple > genres is always a good idea. > > edit: not that harpsichords aren't real music (or your own playing is > not real music). ;-)
You're perfectly right. If someone wants to test if people in general can benefit from FLAC for the majority of music, then my tests are useless. For an answer to this question Archimago's blog is pretty clear about that. But my personal null hypothesis was: Under no circumstances I'm able to hear any difference between FLAC and 320kbps on a properly converted radio-friendly track. For this case, the null hypothesis has to be rejected. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
