linuxaudio.org

--0015175df39a5aa96004af0d6ca7

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Atte,
if you already mentioned Massenburg,

he makes some high quality (and high price tag) analog devices mostly used

by mastering engineers.

He "should" know his stuff.
It happens to be that just today I came across this vid of Bob Katz (a well

known mastering engineer),

he uses the mp3 artifacts too but with a different purpose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D8EgamkLkXW8&feature=3Drelated
Hope you find it interesting.

Moshe
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Atte Andr=E9 Jensen  wrote=

:
> On 10/11/2011 11:36 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

quoted text
>

>  There are at least two good reasons why such a test is

>> not valid.

>>

>> 1. The difference signal doesn't tell you anything about

>> audible differences between two signals. It's fairly easy

>> to make a linear filter (no compression involved) with

>> a perfectly flat response and that nobody would be able

>> to hear. But when you take the difference between in and

>> out it is 3 dB higher than both.

>>

>> 2. Lossy compression is based on combined temporal and

>> spectral masking - some signals you can't hear in the

>> presence of others. Of course when you take away the

>> masking signal they become apparent...

>>

>

> Makes a lot of sense, thanks!

>

> BTW: Apparently the guy in the link has lifted the idea from this clip:

>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=3DwzJbjHc6bRE

>

> where George Massenburg does the same. I don't know George Massenburg, bu=

t

quoted text
> he supposedly is some kine of authority in the world of audio engineering=

.

quoted text
> Not that it makes the test more valid...

>

>

> --

> Atte

>

> http://atte.dk   http://modlys.dk

> ______________________________**_________________

> Linux-audio-user mailing list

> Linux-audio-user@lists.**linuxaudio.org

> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/**listinfo/linux-audio-user

>

--0015175df39a5aa96004af0d6ca7

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Atte,if you already mentioned Massenburg, h=

e makes some high quality (and high price tag) analog devices mostly used b=

y mastering engineers. He "should" know his stuff.It =

happens to be that just today I came across this vid of Bob Katz (a well kn=

own mastering engineer),

he uses the mp3 artifacts too but with a different purpose.htt=

p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D8EgamkLkXW8&feature=3Drelated=

Hope you find it interesting.

MosheOn Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at=

 11:42 PM, Atte Andr=E9 Jensen <atte@email.dk> wrote:

On 10/11/2011 11:36 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
There are at least two good reasons why such a test is

not valid.
1. The difference signal doesn't tell you anything about

audible differences between two signals. It's fairly easy

to make a linear filter (no compression involved) with

a perfectly flat response and that nobody would be able

to hear. But when you take the difference between in and

out it is 3 dB higher than both.
2. Lossy compression is based on combined temporal and

spectral masking - some signals you can't hear in the

presence of others. Of course when you take away the

masking signal they become apparent...
Makes a lot of sense, thanks!
BTW: Apparently the guy in the link has lifted the idea from this clip:
=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DwzJbjHc6bRE
where George Massenburg does the same. I don't know George Massenburg, =

but he supposedly is some kine of authority in the world of audio engineeri=

ng. Not that it makes the test more valid...
--

Atte
http://atte.dk =A0 http://modlys.dk=
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

=

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--0015175df39a5aa96004af0d6ca7--