From: Fred Maxwell <rockbox_at_anti-spam.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:59:55 -0500

Björn Stenberg wrote:

> RTFA. At least the C'T test *was* double-blind. The testers downloaded
> seven .wav files and rated them without knowing which file was which
> codec.

What you describe is a blind test. For it to be double-blind, the persons
administering the tests would also need to be unaware of which file each
tester got until after the test was completed. It was unclear whether they
were or were not. A blind test is certainly of more value than one which is
not, but it is not as good as a double-blind test.

You are also extrapolating too much from that test. While Ogg Vorbis might
have been superior at the low bit rates they tested (64, 128, and 160), it
may not have fared nearly so well in a test against a high quality VBR MP3.
We just don't know.

Regards,
  Fred Maxwell
 
Received on 2003-12-21