lrossouw wrote: > I think we sort of agree. The paper is a paper. It's in "theory > space". In practice things are different and the paper might have some > implications in edge cases. Also in practice people test encoders etc. > I can see how it can be misused by the other crowd. I wasn't trying to > say that lossy encoding is no good. I can't tell the difference between > a mp3 and a flac if the bitrate isn't too low. But I know I don't like > low bit rate mp3. > > I wil read the other comments. Thanks!
That practice is that humans have not changed and testing of digital audio is made with actual humans so this effect is already taken into account even if we did not know about it . Thats whats so good with proper ABX testing you have actually taken care of unknown factors and may also be able discover new unknown factors . The other crowd misses the fact that this testing is was to all kinds of digital audio 16/44.1 vas hirez vs analog etc and good conclusions is already there , and tests where done with actual humans and the result would not change afterwards because some hiherto unknown property of our hearing have got a better explanation . ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98124 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
