On Apr 3, 2013 1:42 PM, "Ralf Mardorf" <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 13:54 +0200, Raffaele Morelli wrote:
> > 2013/4/3 Peder Hedlund <peder@musikhuset.org>:
> > > In view of the recent debate regarding the alledged "crappiness" of MP3 I
> > > thought it would be fun to see if the LAU society can tell lame (v3.99.4)
> > > MP3s from the original.
> > >
> > > Everyone is invited to download the testfiles from
> > > http://www.musikhuset.org/~peder/AxelF.zip , see if you can ABX them and
> > > post the result.
> > > There's one original WAV file and then 3 MP3s of various bitrates, which
> > > have all been converted back to WAV.
> > >
> > > The 165 MP3 was created using "-V4", the 124 "-V6" and the 108 "-V8
> > > --resample 44.1" (since it wanted to make a 24 kHz file otherwise).
> > >
> > > - Peder
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > trials 10
> >
> > against 165: correct 5, p-value 0.623
> > against 124: correct 7, p-value 0.172
> > against 108: correct 9, p-value 0.011
> >
> > side effects: back to the '80 and doing the moonwalk B-)
>
> Playing one file after the other using VLC -> Jack @ 48KHz -> HDSPe AIO
> phones out -> AKG K 240 DF I didn't notice a difference for the audio
> quality. _But_ the mix of the original wav for sure is nice for that
> kind of music, but it isn't a high quality audio recording useful for
> this test.

Just as a matter of interest, what would be a suitable high quality recording?