Comment Re:But what about bitrates that people actually us (Score 1) 331
Sure a test at a higher bitrate would be interesting since that should be the quality to go if you want to archive your music. But this kind of test would be nearly impossible
In this 64kbps test there were not that many participants. Spotting the artifacts was pretty simple and you didn't need "golden ears". In the previous 128kpbs test most samples had to be so called "hard to encode" samples so that the listeners could detect the artifacts.
If we go even higher in bitrate (where the codecs are supposed to be transparent) most people can't spot artifacts any longer - even with problem samples. It would be hard to find enough people to get a statistically relevant result.
In this 64kbps test there were not that many participants. Spotting the artifacts was pretty simple and you didn't need "golden ears". In the previous 128kpbs test most samples had to be so called "hard to encode" samples so that the listeners could detect the artifacts.
If we go even higher in bitrate (where the codecs are supposed to be transparent) most people can't spot artifacts any longer - even with problem samples. It would be hard to find enough people to get a statistically relevant result.
