> Jake Hamby wrote:
>
> The problem with comparing different encoders right now is that we don't
> yet
> have access to any substitute for human listening tests (there's an ITU-R
> standard for measurement and Opticom has a program
> called Opera which is supposed to measure it, but it's not intended for
> consumer use ...
>
I think you're missing the point here, Jake. Music is a subjective
experience, and also involves ears, little wiggly bones and other squishy
stuff. How can you expect to measure "perceived audio quality" with a thing
that has no perception ? I don't care if some machine says it's perfect or
rubbish. In any case, try not to get caught up in listening to the "sound of
the sound" to the point where you forget the music.
simon
PS. Thanks for your 2 long posts, they made interesting reading
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
