AAC and WAV - Taste the difference.

[Labarum]

Can you tell the difference between an AAC lossy file at 256kb/s and its parent WAV file?

There is a test running on Zerogain at the moment. Marco has suggested I invite you to:

Sign up.
Download.
Listen.
Vote.

Wait to hear if you got it right.

Look here:

http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25890

[jonners]

I've just compared the first few seconds of the Monheit tracks so far, with headphones off the laptop. Pretty clear differences to me, the file that I think is the wav sounds more open and cleaner and with more natural sibilants.

[Stratmangler]

Can't see the point of comparing lossy with non-lossy files, as the lossy files will always come out worst.
AAC files sound better than MP3 files of the same bitrate.
A WAV file of the same track will always sound better than any lossy compression method devised to date.

Pointless exercise IMO.

[Stratmangler]

Can't see the point of comparing lossy with non-lossy files, as the lossy files will always come out worst.

Why AAC ?
Has this got something to do with iTunes shop ?

Why on earth don't iTunes do the decent thing and admit that FLAC is a valid format ?
More to the point, why don't they support it ?

[Labarum]

Can't see the point of comparing lossy with non-lossy files, as the lossy files will always come out worst.
AAC files sound better than MP3 files of the same bitrate.
A WAV file of the same track will always sound better than any lossy compression method devised to date.

Pointless exercise IMO.

At what bitrate do the differences become vanishingly small?

It is not a pointless exercise, unless you are prepared to maintain your position in the face of data collected in a properly staged blind subjective test.

Why not listen and vote?

Rob Holt's first test on Zerogain produced a 50/50 split in a sample of 20.

This test is more comprehensive and it is hoped the sample will be much bigger. The first test used MP3, as you say AAC does better at a given bitrate, so the bar has been raised.

I don't imagine for one minute that Apple has any involvement in this test.

I agree with you, Apple ought to have the grace to allow iTunes to play other formats, even if that impairs Apples total integration policy. Let the user decide.

But let's not get sidetracked.

Please listen and vote. In the first round some who were absolutely convinced they could always tell the difference got it wrong.

[Clive]

Whilst this is a blind test it's not thoroughly useful or repeatable. It would need to be staged on one system or a specified collection of systems. Here the sort of thing I'm getting at:

Using Beresford 7520 DAC via USB I couldn't detect the difference between PC to DAC connection via 10m of USB cable with repeater or a 1m USB cable. Having done the "passive mod" you'd have to be truly deaf not to hear the difference.

So what I'm saying is, how useful and reliable can the results of this AAC vs WAV poll be? Any particular vote simply says what that individual heard via their system. Some systems may not be good enough to allow the listener to discern a difference, some listeners may only want background music and don't hear the subtlety WAVs may bring over AAC. The poll is a little interesting but it can't give any really meaningful insight, there are too many variables.

[Labarum]

Whilst this is a blind test it's not thoroughly useful or repeatable.

Those point's I have already made on Zerogain. The test will "prove" nothing, but it could be fun; and it could demonstrate to some individuals that the matter is not as clear as they would like to think.

Interestingly, the folk at Harbeth have said that they cannot easily tell the difference between a 128kb/s MP3 and a lossless file.

[StanleyB]

Obviously owners of a TC-7520 or Caiman with the passive mod have an advantage over the majority of the listening public when it comes to hearing differences. I can pick up the difference between a FLAC and a WAV file now.

[DSJR]

Try re-constituting an MP3 file back to red-book and see what happens... I don't think it's as cut and dried as these tests suggest.

[Labarum]

Try re-constituting an MP3 file back to red-book and see what happens... I don't think it's as cut and dried as these tests suggest.

What does that mean, Dave?