MP3 vs WAV: The Blind Test - Can YOU tell the difference?

[Bunny]

That's because I am an acoustics engineer. 

High bitrate lossy formats should not sound awful. Something is wrong if they do. In a car there's a lot of background noise etc. Who needs High End sound in those situations?  Frankly, if you find 320 kbps AAC or mp3 files awful in car the problem might be between the ears...

Do not ask me what is going on in that car (or SUV actually), but compressed files sound thin -- like watered down booze.  And I've tried everything up to 320kbps MP4.  I think it has to do with the poor bass or non-existant highs.  Nothing sounds great in that truck, but some things sound worse.

I haven't used much lossless formats. I find them very weakly supported. My iPod does not support lossless sound.  On the other hand high bitrate AAC or mp3 gives good sound, at least for noisy outdoor listening.

Ogg Vorbis is a lossy format similar to mp3 and of similar sound quality.

MLP is Meridian Lossless Packing. A proprietary lossless compression technique for compressing PCM audio data developed by Meridian Audio, Ltd. MLP is the standard lossless compression method for DVD-Audio content (often advertised with the Advanced Resolution logo) and typically provides about 2:1 compression on most music material. All DVD-Audio players are equipped with MLP decoding, while its use on the discs themselves is at their producers' discretion.

MPEG-4 ALS is similar to FLAC in its operation. Simply put it is a quantized LPC predictor with a losslessly coded residual using Golomb Rice Coding or Bounded Gilbert Moore Coding (BGMC).

Lossless formats are similar to each other, some algorithms are just little more "intelligent" than other giving better compression ratio. In my opinion there is too many formats and they are too weakly supported. One well-supported format is what we need.

thanks for the explanation of the different formats.  Which format has the "smartest" algorithm? 

You must have a very early generation ipod or a shuffle.  Most of the ipods do support alac.

[orbital]

Do not ask me what is going on in that car (or SUV actually), but compressed files sound thin -- like watered down booze.  And I've tried everything up to 320kbps MP4. 

In that case, you are blessed (or cursed in this case?  ) with very sensitive hearing. 320kbps AFAIK is very close to impossible to differentiate from CD quality.

[71 dB]

Do not ask me what is going on in that car (or SUV actually), but compressed files sound thin -- like watered down booze.  And I've tried everything up to 320kbps MP4.  I think it has to do with the poor bass or non-existant highs.  Nothing sounds great in that truck, but some things sound worse.

Perhaps the problem is in your speaker system?

thanks for the explanation of the different formats.  Which format has the "smartest" algorithm?

No problem. La (lossless Audio) has the best algorithms.

You must have a very early generation ipod or a shuffle.  Most of the ipods do support alac.

I have Shuffle 512 MB.

[Mark]

320kbps AFAIK is very close to impossible to differentiate from CD quality.

Don't kid yourself. Three people here have so far been able to tell correctly between a 320kbps MP3 file and a WAV file ... and two of them had less-than-high-end kit.

[orbital]

vow, impressive. For me and the majority of human beings it is not possible 

[tjguitar]

That's because I am an acoustics engineer. 

High bitrate lossy formats should not sound awful. Something is wrong if they do. In a car there's a lot of background noise etc. Who needs High End sound in those situations?  Frankly, if you find 320 kbps AAC or mp3 files awful in car the problem might be between the ears...

I haven't used much lossless formats. I find them very weakly supported. My iPod does not support lossless sound.  On the other hand high bitrate AAC or mp3 gives good sound, at least for noisy outdoor listening.

Ogg Vorbis is a lossy format similar to mp3 and of similar sound quality.

MLP is Meridian Lossless Packing. A proprietary lossless compression technique for compressing PCM audio data developed by Meridian Audio, Ltd. MLP is the standard lossless compression method for DVD-Audio content (often advertised with the Advanced Resolution logo) and typically provides about 2:1 compression on most music material. All DVD-Audio players are equipped with MLP decoding, while its use on the discs themselves is at their producers' discretion.

MPEG-4 ALS is similar to FLAC in its operation. Simply put it is a quantized LPC predictor with a losslessly coded residual using Golomb Rice Coding or Bounded Gilbert Moore Coding (BGMC).

Lossless formats are similar to each other, some algorithms are just little more "intelligent" than other giving better compression ratio. In my opinion there is too many formats and they are too weakly supported. One well-supported format is what we need.

Not familiar with these formats mentioned above, the most common lossless audio files were FLAC, SHN and APE.

[George]

vow, impressive. For me and the majority of human beings it is not possible 

Who said we are all human? 

[Greta]

I've run into MPC files before, is this another lossless compression?

[Bunny]

In that case, you are blessed (or cursed in this case?  ) with very sensitive hearing. 320kbps AFAIK is very close to impossible to differentiate from CD quality.

I can't tell the difference on my computer on the silly desktop speakers I've had for years or with any of my headphones.  I can't tell the difference on the ipod using any of my headphones.  If I burn the files to cd and play them on my large speaker system with my 2005 top of the line dvd/cd player and canton speakers anyone could hear the difference.  If I take that cd into the truck, anyone can hear the difference.  It's not just the files that make the difference.  It's also the sound card, the speakers, the player, the headphones, etc. that come into play.  I don't listen to lossy compressed music except on the ipod or on the computer for those reasons.  (shrugs shoulders). 

Perhaps the problem is in your speaker system?

Obviously!  And nothing really sounds great on the system either. (Ford/Mercury multi cd player system - supplied with the truck)

No problem. La (lossless Audio) has the best algorithms.

Another codec I've never heard of!  And I'll bet it's not supported by many players either.  Well, as they say in French, tant pis!

I have Shuffle 512 MB.

Aha - I thought so!  Sorry about that, but with only 512 MB, lossless files aren't very practical. 

[sTisTi]

Don't kid yourself. Three people here have so far been able to tell correctly between a 320kbps MP3 file and a WAV file ... and two of them had less-than-high-end kit.

I hope everyone is honest! Because it is very easy to cheat by looking at the wav files with certain tools, and even deaf people could tell which are the original and the MP3 sourced wav files...

[Mark]

I hope everyone is honest! Because it is very easy to cheat by looking at the wav files with certain tools, and even deaf people could tell which are the original and the MP3 sourced wav files...

What would one look for? I've already indicated that filesize alone would be misleading.

[sTisTi]

What would one look for? I've already indicated that filesize alone would be misleading.

Mark, please check your PM

[Mark]

Mark, please check your PM

I have done. Thank you ... very interesting!

[Mark]

Okay, update time:

There have so far been 102 visitors to the Blind Test Site - a large percentage of which are undoubtedly lurkers (come on, you anonymous lot - show yourselves and let's have your views!) - but I've only had about six or seven PMs from people giving me their full and final answers. [NB: I should point out that I never expected members to PM me their results, but it's been interesting reading off-board about their very different test experiences.]

Some of you have also posted complete and incomplete guesses in this thread, and while I haven't yet totted up numbers, I think we've had in total about ten or so disclosed attempts at this test. Perhaps more - like I say, I've not counted accurately yet.

What I can reveal at this stage is that two members of this forum correctly identified all four clips on their very first attempt (interestingly, neither of whom used high-end equipment to test); two more got a perfect score at the second attempt. One member came pretty close but hasn't yet tried again, and another member cheated ... but told me they had done so, merely to prove that cheating is, in fact, perfectly possible. I learned something new from them.

I won't be naming names AT ALL in this thread or by PM (incidentally, all successful guesses have had PM confirmation from me), but will restrict myself to revealing the answers on Sunday July 1st as promised. And of course, to uploading the complete work as a thank you to all for taking part.

[Mark]

Oh, for anyone interested, here's the cover of the CD I used for this test:

[George]

Oh, for anyone interested, here's the cover of the CD I used for this test:

Sure that isn't one of Haffner's Metal CDs? 

[sidoze]

and another member cheated ... but told me they had done so, merely to prove that cheating is, in fact, perfectly possible. I learned something new from them.

You've just gotta love candid cheaters. 

[Bunny]

Not sure if y'all were aware that much of the EMI catalogue on iTunes is now (optionally) available in DRM-free 256 kbps AAC as part of so-called "iTunes Plus:"

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/05/30itunesplus.html

I've been told that the catch with MP4 (AAC is Apple's version of MP4) is that DRM can be inserted at anytime, even after you own the files.  It's part of the nature of the "capsule" that they use for storing the information.  If you sync your ipod with your computer on line, it is theoretically possible for Itunes, at any date, to insert some form of drm in the files.  MP4 was designed so that drm could be changed or updated if the codes were cracked or corrupted.  Call me paranoid, if you wish, but DRM is probably one of the hot button issues of 21st century downloaded music.  No one has followed EMI doing this.

Another peculiarity about those DRM free files is that the cost of most of the albums I looked at was slightly higher than the cost if I bought it at BMG music clubs or the Amazon marketplace.  I can't really understand why anyone would pay more for compressed music when they can get the same thing uncompressed for less.  If you don't want to be bothered with the cds, you can rip them yourself and resell the cds or give them away.  Now, if Itunes was offering something that's rare and oop, I'd be the first on line for it.  Unfortunately, those type recordings don't earn much money, so they aren't offered. 

[Mark]

Bunny, just for the record, AAC isn't Apple's version of anything ... that's just a popular misconception. See here.

As for why someone might buy a more expensively priced compressed album of music, one word: convenience. I want it, and I want it now, so I'll pay for it. You may not subscribe to this. Millions do. That's why downloads will succeed, and why they're already eating heavily into CD sales. And not just for rare of OOP stuff, either.

Oh, and for music on independent labels, eMusic's subscription package (giving access to DRM-free MP3 files at high-quality VBR) beats the bejesus out of most other download stores' pricing models, offering genuine value for money. I get 90 downloads a month for £14.99 - you can do the math. Okay, so there's no DG, EMI, Philips, Decca. But there is Supraphon, LSO Live, Naxos, BIS, Ondine, Atma, Avie, Hanssler and many, many more. And the best part? Unlike Napster or HMV whose subscription services effectively 'kill' your downloads if you stop paying monthly, there's absolutely none of that with eMusic. And you can stop or restart your subscription any time you like.

[beclemund]

I've been told that the catch with MP4 (AAC is Apple's version of MP4) is that DRM can be inserted at anytime, even after you own the files.  It's part of the nature of the "capsule" that they use for storing the information.  If you sync your ipod with your computer on line, it is theoretically possible for Itunes, at any date, to insert some form of drm in the files.  MP4 was designed so that drm could be changed or updated if the codes were cracked or corrupted.  Call me paranoid, if you wish, but DRM is probably one of the hot button issues of 21st century downloaded music.  No one has followed EMI doing this.

Another peculiarity about those DRM free files is that the cost of most of the albums I looked at was slightly higher than the cost if I bought it at BMG music clubs or the Amazon marketplace.  I can't really understand why anyone would pay more for compressed music when they can get the same thing uncompressed for less.  If you don't want to be bothered with the cds, you can rip them yourself and resell the cds or give them away.  Now, if Itunes was offering something that's rare and oop, I'd be the first on line for it.  Unfortunately, those type recordings don't earn much money, so they aren't offered. 

I do not know anything about DRM within MP4 files or how it might retroactively be installed... I do know that DRM comes with an additional cost, in terms of overhead, to the user. DRM'd files are larger and require more resources by your PC, DAP or whathave you for play back, so you pay a higher cost in power spent (battery time on your iPod for instance) and space used.

While no one has followed EMI's steps in the DRM-free distribution through iTunes, I cannot imagine that it will remain that way. For the most part, it is really only the major labels that insist on DRM releases... BIS, Harmonia Mundi, Hanssler and hundreds of other labels distribute much of their catalog without DRM through other download services that compete with iTunes (emusic and eclassical for instance). It may take some time for Sony, Warner, Universal, etc. to jump on board, but they will or they will be left behind.

As for the prices for iTunes plus, they are the same as their DRM material for an entire album purchase. And not everyone is a smart shopper, so the 9.99 USD cost at iTunes is far better than the 17.99 USD price at brick and mortar shops. Granted, I would be more than willing to pay 12.99 USD for the same item on a physical CD.... there are just some things downloads cannot replace.

Oh, and buying, ripping then reselling CDs is every bit as illegal as using illicit file-sharing for the same. So you may as well save yourself gas, postage and/or time and illegally download... Not that I condone that, it just seems inefficient to do it the other way. 

Now if iTunes would distribute their DRM-free downloads in lossless (FLAC or ALAC) and included many OOP performances, I would be buying regularly.