Certainly, Audacity can downsample, but I'm not sure you could AB test with it. I believe that Foobar has this facility though.davedotco said:You are miss-understanding the test, probably my fault, if I am not being clear.Glacialpath said:Dave you state things with such finallity.davedotco said:The information is not audible and therefore irrelevant. In the broadest terms.
There is a very simple experiment that virtually anyone can do.
Find a good quality hi-res download that you like.
Down sample to Cd standard, 16 bit, 44.1 Khz.
After carefully level matching the two files, listen and compare, but do so blind.
Report what you hear.
Why would you compabe a down sampled Hi-res audio file to a CD? You would just be making it the same as the CD surely? That sounds stupid to me.
A DTS HD-MA sound track clearly sounds better and more dynamic than a DTS track becuause there is more information there and it's not been compressed. Simple as that.
Blind tested people would say that DTS track would be better because they can hear more more easily due to the compression or dynamic limitation. That doesn't make it better or even as good as uncompressed audio.
Of course a movie mix or album will never be true to life completely because its a fake copy of real life sound. Unless you are listening t one instrument then you could leave it's full dynamic range and nothing would be there to cover up the small subtle sounds.
Comparing a CD, or a rip of a CD, to a hi-res download is indeed pointless, we have no idea of the provenance of the material in either case.
In this case the test is to use the best hi-res file that you have and downsample it to 16/44.1 as a copy.
You then compare the original hi-res file to the new 16/44.1 copy in a level matched blind test.
I believe that this can be done in Audacity, though you may need some extra software (plug in) to do so.