Counterpart to: [Hidden link. Register to see links.]
Fill with your assortments of jibble-jabble & the like; informative and/or argumentative, all with regards to the quality representation (or misrepresentation, if you like) of lossless audio.
Every bit of that sort of talk goes in this thread and NOT the above one (which is for d/l links and specific talk with regards to the links/files themselves...)
---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:52 PM ----------
It's not easy to pick out a quality difference given a track you've never heard before, especially one with little dynamic range, so I'd be completely unfazed if I'm incorrect in guessing the following:
alpha and delta are supposedly mp3, or something of a lower caliber (but I'd bet on mp3) 'delta' is the higher bit-rate of these two.
gamma must be the lossless encoding (this seems the crispest of the bunch), and beta is something of a considerably high-fidelity (I'd put my money on AAC?)
I cross-compared alpha and delta on a spectrograph, because I couldn't tell the difference in clarity between them from listening alone. They were obviously the 2 lowest-quality though.