search for: unbeaten

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "unbeaten".

Did you mean: beaten
2017 Apr 18
1
Antw: Re: 133 kbps stereo killer sample
...al from the sampling points, and the reconsruction could actually exceed the sampling point, which my result in an overdrive, which will result in clipping. I just wonder whether the encoder (or the decoder at least) can or should warn in such situations. Regards, Ulrich > > Opus remains unbeaten for me at 133 kbps. That's totally awesome. > > Cheers > > On 10 April 2017 at 17:14, Agustín Dall'Alba <agustin at dallalba.com.ar> wrote: >> Hello! I found a sample I can ABX successfully when encoded at >> 133.333 kbps. I was targetting 1 MB/min. >>...
2017 Apr 10
2
133 kbps stereo killer sample
Hello! I found a sample I can ABX successfully when encoded at 133.333 kbps. I was targetting 1 MB/min. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B8KWShoIrA1kQzR1Z0FFRUlfcEU floex.wav is 4:54–5:04 of a lossless copy of 'Forget-me-not' by Floex, downloaded from http://store.floex.cz/album/zorya floex-133.opus was created with `opusenc --bitrate 133.333333 floex.wav floex-133.opus`,
2017 Apr 14
0
133 kbps stereo killer sample
I halved the volume of the sample before encoding with `sox -v 0.5 floex.wav quiet.wav` and now I can't ABX it succesfully anymore. So the artifact I heard was just clipping when encoding or decoding. Opus remains unbeaten for me at 133 kbps. That's totally awesome. Cheers On 10 April 2017 at 17:14, Agustín Dall'Alba <agustin at dallalba.com.ar> wrote: > Hello! I found a sample I can ABX successfully when encoded at > 133.333 kbps. I was targetting 1 MB/min. > > https://drive.google.com/dr...