The test file was encoded with Yamaha's TwinVQ encoder 
              and decoded using JAEP's plugin for WinAmp. This plugin is an interface 
              to NTT's decoder and code book and so gives the same audio quality 
              as using Yamaha's player but you can save the output as a wave file.
            
              NTT TwinVQ HQ 96kb/s Frequency Response
            
              NTT TwinVQ HQ 96kb/s Spectral View
            When we look at the frequency response of a 96kb/s 
              VQF file encoded at high quality we see that the output extends 
              right up to 22kHz. The frequency response above 12kHz is suppressed 
              a bit when compared to the source material. It is this suppression 
              of higher frequencies I believe that leads to the slight loss of 
              treble detail as compared to the original.
            When we look at the the spectral view of the VQF file 
              we see an amazing correlation to the spectral view of the source 
              material. There is some suppression of material above 20kHz and 
              almost no degradation below 20kHz. This is really superb considering 
              that the file is two thirds the size of a 128kb/s MP3 file.
            Listening tests reveal no noticeable encoding artifacts. 
              This holds for source material that produces noticeable artifacts 
              in 128kb/s MP3 encoding such as the Local Hero live recording I 
              mentioned earlier. In some recordings the VQF file tends to lack 
              some presence when compared to the source material. Even with headphones 
              you can hear that the VQF file does not  have as good stereo 
              imaging as an MP3 files for complex material.
            I personally would almost always choose a 96kb/s VQF 
              file over a 128kb/s MP3 file. This is because I am far more tolerant 
              of reduction in stereo imaging in a recording than encoding artifacts. 
              In most instances I would say 96kb/s VQF files are not as good as 
              160kb/s MP3 files. This is definitely true for the source material 
              reviewed here.
            CPU utilization on my system for playback is an acceptable 
              35%. The major drawback of VQF encoding is that it is very slow. 
            
            I feel that TwinVQ is definitely an alternative to 
              MP3 for mainstream usage especially in portable applications like 
              Walkman type players. I would not be surprised to see "music 
              on a chip-card" type players from Yamaha in the near future. 
            
            I hope to see NTT or Yamaha release a 128kb/s version 
              of their codec soon as this should eliminate the shortcomings of 
              96kb/s files.
            [Back] [Next]