garym wrote: > Ah. Ok. So to clarify, if we ignore the hires downsample track, you > tested 3 tracks and on two of them you were able to distinguish based on > ABX test. Correct?
Exactly. Not more and not less. garym wrote: > I agree. There are people with uniquely good* hearing for these sorts of > things and you appear to be one of them. (And you've documented this > with ABX tests, unlike the many other "audiophiles" that simply assume > they have really good hearing/revealing systems without doing any blind > testing!) > > *or "bad" in the sense that as posted elsewhere, in some cases actual > problems with hearing can make the listener better able to distinguish > lossy from lossless. I actually like the assumption posted in that other blog. If a codec thinks something is overshadowed by other frequencies and decides to eliminate that, this might just work for the average (good) ear. As soon as the the information which supposedly should be dominant is longer audible, we might have a problem. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
