Most sound editors allow you to display FFT's and othe transforms either
as Spectra or 2d sonograms.
Messy audio looks totally different to the original when you performa a
frequency analysis - the Bass and the high end are Boosted by a huge amount.
When you look at the spectra it's amazing how most people have trouble
telling the difference... I guess modern culture is used to overly
compressed audio from teh radio ;-)
Scott Manley (aka Szyzyg) /------ _@/ Mail -----\
___ _ _ __ __ _ | Armagh Observatory |
/ __| __ ___| |_| |_ | \/ |__ _ _ _ | |___ _ _ | Armagh |
\__ \/ _/ _ \ _| _| | |\/| / _` | ' \| / -_) || | | Northern Ireland |
|___/\__\___/\__|\__| |_| |_\__,_|_||_|_\___|\_, | | BT61 9DG. |
http://star.arm.ac.uk/~spm/welcome.html |__/ \=====================/
On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Leonardo Stern wrote:
> > It would be nice if such a program existed. If it really could tell
> > which format sounded the best, it would in effect contain a perfect
> > psycho-acoustic model. In reality, there is no perfect psy-model,
> > so if you find such a test program, it will only tell you which codec is
> > using a psy-model closest to the one used to measure quality in the
> > test program.
> >
> > Mark
> >
>
> Let me explain what I want isn't a program that compares 2 codecs
> I want a program that analize the frequency response of a wav (ripped
> from cd) and a mp3 or other and display both response graphics
>
> My mp3 x wma tests sadly say that wma is better quality in lower
> bitrates
> But I not have any kind of frequency analizer, I used a external
> equalizer and some people to help me
>
> I encoded 4 types of music and always the wma sounds better even in 96
> kbps. But I want to do more tests with different coputers, comparing
> methods, musics, etc.
>
> > --
> > MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
> --
> MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
>
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
