|
|
Posted by Arny Krueger on 12/01/07 11:04
"Jack" <jack@beanstalk.net> wrote in message
news:Xns99F8DEE5D5EE6jack@216.168.3.44
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in
> news:sMqdnY61IZu4ls3anZ2dnUVZ_oesnZ2d@comcast.com:
>
>> "Jack" <jack@beanstalk.net> wrote in message
>> news:13kv43li2b63l90@corp.supernews.com
>>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in
>>> news:NaidneXYer06NNPanZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@comcast.com:
>>>
>>>> Where are the results of your DBTs?
>>>>
>>>> Anybody can write poetry. Real men can hear differences
>>>> in blind tests, or admit they can't.
>>>
>>> Real men? If you listen to the WMA file you'll hear that
>>> no blind tests are needed in this case.
>>
>> Jack, real men can read and obviously you can't. I
>> posted the results of my blind tests with Steven's files
>> on 11/28. That was two days ago. Where are yours?
>>
>> All I did is transform Stephen's coded files back into
>> .wav files with standard software and compare those .wav
>> files adn the original .wav file with some well-known
>> free software that is pointed to by links at
>> www.pcabx.com .
>>
>> BTW, blind tests comparing .wav files to coded files are
>> slam-dunk easy. Please see www.pcabx.com and the
>> Hydrogen Audio forums for more information.
>
> It looks like you're trying to market something that's
> not pertinent to this example.
How not pertinent?
> Pomposity isn't much of a sales technique, either.
I'm not selling a thing, just trying to shake you out of your intellectual
slumber.
>>> I already described in detail what the artifacts are.
>> No Jack, you just posted some poetry.
> Is your agenda to argue for the sake of argument?
If you haven't noticed Jack, you're the only person reporting audible
problems here, as far as I can see.
> Listen to the files already.
I listened to Steven's files already, Jack. Talk about being full of
yourself!
> Here they are, properly named now.
> http://www.badongo.com/file/5372691 (Down By The River
> 3:30-4:00 WAV)
Broken link.
> http://www.badongo.com/file/5372700 (Down
> By The River 3:30-4:00 WMA)
Broken link
> http://www.badongo.com/file/5372709 (Down By The River
> 3:30-4:00 MP3)
Broken link
> When something sounds that much off, ABX or ABC or ABD is
> not needed.
All the golden ears with their heads in the ground say exactly that. Magic
wires, green pens, magic amplifiers, they say it for the whole enchelada.
> You started off inexplicably assuming I'm opposed to
> blind testing,
No, that only became clear when you started going off like this.
> when I hadn't made a single comment on it.
The ignorance and hostility is oozing out of your post, Jack.
> I'm all for blind testing if there are subtle
> differences, but that's not the case here. Are you of the
> mind that the whole world is against ABX by default?
The whole world against ABX? LOL!
Jack, you're *special*.
> "Anti-ABX conspiracy rocks the metro area!"
Only in your mind, Jack. ABX has been around for almost 30 years, and is
generally recognized as being certain kind of listening test that is good
for situations like this. I don't have to sell squat. I simply point people
to some free, helpful information. Other similarly well-regarded testing
methods that relate include ABC/hr
>> But of course Jack you're always right and people like
>> Steven and I are always wrong, and the fact that all of
>> this technology was developed with blind tests means
>> nothing to you...
> You're tilting at windmills. Listen to the dadburned
> files!
Been there, done that. Thanks for calling me a fool and a liar by
implication.
> I just closed my eyes and heard the difference
> even better. The MP3 is significantly cleaner than the
> WMA, which isn't usually the case with those formats at
> 128 kbps.
Stop stonewalling, Jack.
[Back to original message]
|