This test is flawed as kazinator alluded to. It is just try to find the lowest quality one and pick one of the remaining two as choice. So even with that, chance plays too much of a factor. A true test needs to be double-blind and I would wager that very very few could reliably tell a difference between wav and modern lossy codecs at 192kbit/s or higher. And I know MANY can't even tell anymore, in proper double-blind testing, at 128 or even 96kbit/s using todays better codecs of aac or ogg (mp3 improvement has stalled and currently aac as well as ogg or opus are much better).

In fact, I was JUST reading about this sort of stuff last night when I decided I didn't think I have a need to keep my archived lossless flac almbums anymore. I carefully ripped mine and many borrowed CD's to flac using EAC like 6 years ago with intention that I could get rid of the cd's themselves to Goodwill. I then just converted them to 128kbit/s mp3 for portable/phone listening. Knowing at the time 128 mp3 had its limitations I would just re-convert in the future as the writing was on the wall we were getting close to near perfect compression in regards to the limits of human hearing.

I re-converted several of my favorite albums to Nero aac a couple years ago as I could not distinguish at the time with enough certainty Nero aac (@ 192kbit/s) vs flac using good headphones and my computer. Nero has also stopped development around that time but aac has continued to advance through Apple and Fraunhofer to where we are today.

So last night I ripped all my archived albums to 160kbs iTunes aac and just deleted the archives themselves from my hard drive saving huge chunk of GB's. One, today's codecs are basically transparent at that level for 99.9% of us and two, if I ever do want a full lossless copy of an album in the future for any reason, my high speed internet connection can get them in about 1-2 minutes each (since I purchased them once already I legally owned a copy? Technically though I don't have the hard version anymore).

Then went about enjoying some music for an hour that I had forgotten about.

Some links. More on aac: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding

more on Opus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_%28audio_format%29

Here is more info on ABx testing and codecs as well as some results of scientific listening tests done by the audiophille community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codec_listening_test

Particularly the most recent test in 2014 where Opus is basically transparent to very discerning eats at a surprisingly low 96kbs bitrate. Apple aac also at 96kbs as well as Ogg and latest LAME mp3(needed higher around 136kbs) are not far behind. We are just about at end-game for lossy formats.

http://listening-test.coresv.net/results.htm