Do you hear the difference?

cope · Post by **cope** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:46 pm

Do you hear the difference ...

... or not?

http://mp3ornot.com/

pulsoc · Post by **pulsoc** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:49 pm

I kind of surprised myself by getting it right after one listen. The 320 sample seemed to have "more" to me.

Unless the whole thing is a trick

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:06 pm

Perhaps they should use something a little more up to date? To my ears the both examples are bad in quality..

evernaut · Post by **evernaut** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:22 pm

No, it's clearly a good original recording but the rip is terrible. Even the 320kb rip does the low bitrate 'whistle' on Pav's held note.

They both sound shockingly bad IMO.

But I voted wrong, so maybe I'm just cross

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:26 pm

evernaut wrote:No, it's clearly a good original recording but the rip is terrible. Even the 320kb rip does the low bitrate 'whistle' on Pav's held note.

They both sound shockingly bad IMO.

exactly. Its not something to judge on

Nokatus · Post by **Nokatus** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:29 pm

In my opinion, even if the quality of the better clip is poor, the actual difference between these two clips is really obvious, too.

evernaut · Post by **evernaut** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:31 pm

Nokatus wrote: the quality of the better clip is poor, the actual difference between these two clips is really obvious, too.

OK. I must be cross.

Can you describe the really obvious difference?

Nokatus · Post by **Nokatus** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:35 pm

evernaut wrote:Can you describe the really obvious difference?

For example, listen to the articulation of the consonants in Pavarotti's singing, somewhere around the six seconds mark (right before the percussive stuff kicks in).

nathannn · Post by **nathannn** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:39 pm

i also thought they both sounded poor ( really harsh sounding mid range that all mp3's have).

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:40 pm

i'm not sure i would say it's obvious which one is "better" sounding, but i guessed right (based mainly on the hinky high reverby noise/echo when pav holds that long note and just a general sense that the mp3 sounded somewhat thinner, less warm). i suspect you could easily be thrown by whatever you've just been listening to (e.g., if you'd just listened to something muddy, you might find the mp3 cleaner/sharper, and thus thought it better (maybe not a good example)).

realsurreal · Post by **realsurreal** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:41 pm

I couldn't tell the difference until the high hat sound towards the end. It took me about 4 listens each to be sure.

dpel · Post by **dpel** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:04 pm

i'm glad I got it wrong,
now I can get busy creating music without inane issues to worry about.

kaffein · Post by **kaffein** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:40 pm

Easily could tell the difference, and answered correctly... Now if i were listening on an unfamiliar setup, probably not.

lunabass · Post by **lunabass** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:30 am

kaffein wrote:Now if i were listening on an unfamiliar setup, probably not.

i was wondering about that also. i'm listening here at work thru my g4's internal soundcard on a set of sennheiser hd280 pros but still felt it was quite easy to hear the difference. it took me 2 listens each.

i wonder how easy it would be if the music wasn't so dynamic like some heavily compressed dance music..

Machinate · Post by **Machinate** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:54 am

I hate to be the party pooper and all, but after reading "blink" and other similar books recently, I can't help but feel... ahem. less than impressed by this "test". Now, had they presented 20 tracks in a row, all to be A/B'ed, then it might have been something.

not at this stage. Besides, as some mentioned, what a horrible rip! or horrible recording, even. that high-pitched whine going on is icky.

Do you hear the difference?

Do you hear the difference ...?

Do you hear the difference?