IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

[USELESS] Is Ogg Vorbis aoTuV b2 Q=4,44, transparent for you?
Is Ogg Vorbis aoTuV b2 Q=4,44 transparent for you?
Is Ogg Vorbis aoTuV b2 Q=4,44 transparent for you?
ALWAYS (100% of my music is transparent) [ 14 ] ** [38.89%]
ALMOST (only few killer samples known in my music) [ 10 ] ** [27.78%]
SOMETIMES (I can see difference almost always ...) [ 8 ] ** [22.22%]
NEVER (I always hear difference) [ 4 ] ** [11.11%]
Total Votes: 85
  
Celsus
post Jul 11 2004, 20:18
Post #1





Group: Banned
Posts: 27
Joined: 8-July 04
Member No.: 15155



Is Ogg Vorbis aoTuV b2 Q=4,44 transparent for you?

I mean YOUR music, not special killer samples. If it is not transparent, please tell me in what?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Frank Bicking
post Jul 11 2004, 21:32
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 1832
Joined: 24-July 02
From: Berlin, Germany
Member No.: 2776



8 people have voted so far, which would mean that 8 people are actually using 4.44 or have at least verified their claims in various blind tests. Now, how realistic is that? I rather smell eight TOS#8 violations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Celsus
post Jul 11 2004, 21:56
Post #3





Group: Banned
Posts: 27
Joined: 8-July 04
Member No.: 15155



QUOTE (Frank_Bicking @ Jul 11 2004, 11:32 PM)
8 people have voted so far, which would mean that 8 people are actually using 4.44 or have at least verified their claims in various blind tests. Now, how realistic is that? I rather smell eight TOS#8 violations.
*

Well, read carefully. People select CLOSEST answer. Purpose of this topic is to answer how aoTuV b2 at 4.44 works for normal use, that`s why blind test SHOULD NOT BE USED, i dont ask for results of blind test...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jul 11 2004, 22:00
Post #4





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 09:56 PM)
QUOTE (Frank_Bicking @ Jul 11 2004, 11:32 PM)
8 people have voted so far, which would mean that 8 people are actually using 4.44 or have at least verified their claims in various blind tests. Now, how realistic is that? I rather smell eight TOS#8 violations.
*

Well, read carefully. People select CLOSEST answer. Purpose of this topic is to answer how aoTuV b2 at 4.44 works for normal use, that`s why blind test SHOULD NOT BE USED, i dont ask for results of blind test...
*



People answered for "non-transparency". This statement could be questioned. ABX test should prove the validity of that.
People answered for "full-transparency". ABX tests could bring them to reconsider an optimistic feeling (artifacts might be revealed by an attentive comparison, ruining their immediate "transparency" feeling).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Celsus   [USELESS] Is Ogg Vorbis aoTuV b2 Q=4,44   Jul 11 2004, 20:18
- - Latexxx   Why q 4,44?   Jul 11 2004, 20:20
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jul 11 2004, 10:20 PM)Why q ...   Jul 11 2004, 20:23
|- - Dibrom   QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 11:23 AM)QUOTE (...   Jul 11 2004, 20:56
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (Dibrom @ Jul 11 2004, 10:56 PM)QUOTE (...   Jul 11 2004, 21:02
- - DreamTactix291   I suppose aoTuV b2 at 4.44 would be transparent en...   Jul 11 2004, 21:06
- - analogy   For portable use, I'll encode at Q0 to save sp...   Jul 11 2004, 21:08
- - Latexxx   What bitrate does q 4,44 represent?   Jul 11 2004, 21:14
- - DreamTactix291   Nominal of 142.1kbps.   Jul 11 2004, 21:15
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (DreamTactix291 @ Jul 11 2004, 11:15 PM...   Jul 11 2004, 21:17
- - Latexxx   Why q 4.44 why not 4, 4.5 or 5?   Jul 11 2004, 21:21
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jul 11 2004, 11:21 PM)Why q ...   Jul 11 2004, 21:28
- - Frank_Bicking   8 people have voted so far, which would mean that ...   Jul 11 2004, 21:32
|- - guruboolez   QUOTE (Frank_Bicking @ Jul 11 2004, 09:32 PM)...   Jul 11 2004, 21:35
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (Frank_Bicking @ Jul 11 2004, 11:32 PM)...   Jul 11 2004, 21:56
|- - guruboolez   QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 09:56 PM)QUOTE (...   Jul 11 2004, 22:00
|- - Celsus   QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jul 12 2004, 12:00 AM)QUO...   Jul 11 2004, 22:06
|- - guruboolez   QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 10:06 PM)but ...   Jul 11 2004, 22:15
- - DeeZi   A few preecho optimations should be done. Like in ...   Jul 11 2004, 21:33
- - eagleray   4.99 would make more sense to me as that is the cu...   Jul 11 2004, 22:11
- - Celsus   Ok, so we advice all people to do ABX But poll is...   Jul 11 2004, 22:30
|- - guruboolez   QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 10:30 PM)Ok, so ...   Jul 11 2004, 22:34
- - Celsus   I think that problem is on reader side. If poll is...   Jul 11 2004, 22:51
|- - indybrett   QUOTE (Celsus @ Jul 11 2004, 04:51 PM)I don...   Jul 11 2004, 23:26
|- - Atlantis   QUOTE (indybrett @ Jul 12 2004, 12:26 AM)QUOT...   Jul 12 2004, 07:54
- - Celsus   Well, everyone here has right to have his opinion....   Jul 12 2004, 09:25


Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th September 2014 - 23:41