2003-12-25, 03:41 | Link #1 |
Member
|
MP3 Encoding Formats
I looked into the best sounding MP3 formats a while ago and eventually came up with a few theories as to the best sounding MP3 encosion ^^
A lot of people encode in Default 128kbps CBR which has a good sound quality but can sound tinny and lack body and bass. Also as an optional check point in most MP3 ripping tools there's a "high quality" tab that when kicked, encodes your audio in Joint Stereo (an advancement over Stereo). Myself, I use CDex's LAME MP3 Encoder with my own personal settings that may be a bit heavy on the file size but sound close enough to perfect. http://www.cdex.n3.net/ You can get the Ripping Engine there and if you would like to test my audio stats, please go here: [url]http://server5.uploadit.org/files2/251203-VBR-PJS-TYPE%20(NEW).JPG[url] and copy the settings exactly into CDex's LAME MP3 Encoder. It uses a VBR method with a range from 192kbps to 320kbps, prooviding a high quality range that suits most volumes. It has a heavy advantage over CBR because of it's intelligence and will not mess up the ID-V3 tags or make mistakes in the time or ABR like most VBR methods do. Please enjoy ^^ |
2003-12-25, 03:47 | Link #2 |
r00t for life
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: /dev/null
|
Mp3 sucks and it should die...it was around for too long, time for better things to take them place Here is better alternative to crappy mp3 http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/listen.html
|
2003-12-25, 04:13 | Link #7 | ||
r00t for life
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: /dev/null
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2003-12-25, 04:28 | Link #9 |
r00t for life
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: /dev/null
|
I guess u didn't understand ogg...ever heard of RTFM? Ogg at lower bitrates allows for same quality and less filesize. Try to encode song in 192kbs with mp3 and then encode with ogg at 96kbs (or 92 I don't remember) and see that filesize will be smaller, but quality will be the same. If you're paranoid then encode with ogg at 128kbs
P.S. Really read docs...before you say something |
2003-12-25, 04:39 | Link #10 | |
lv.2 频道贼
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Age: 42
|
Quote:
Thanks for the info, I shall start using Ogg ^^ |
|
2003-12-25, 09:13 | Link #12 | |
Europeon
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yurup
Age: 37
|
Quote:
|
|
2003-12-25, 09:26 | Link #14 |
Afflicted by the vanities
Fansubber
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fish-shape Paumanok
Age: 36
|
I've use Winamp 5 and QCD to encode to Ogg... the "cleanest" way to do it is Exact Audio Copy, but that takes way too long compared to Winamp.
Ogg at 96kbit is definitely not equal to 192kbit MP3. It's really close, though.
__________________
|
2003-12-25, 09:52 | Link #16 |
Afflicted by the vanities
Fansubber
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fish-shape Paumanok
Age: 36
|
Ogg Vorbis quality is on a scale of 1 to 10, I think, and 6 is good enough for most people. 3-5 will make OK quality and a smaller size than MP3.
QCD is free, you can get it here: http://www.quinnware.com/ and download the Vorbis plugin on the same website Winamp is free but the Vorbis plugin is secret and you're not allowed to download it
__________________
|
2003-12-25, 10:18 | Link #17 | |
Europeon
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yurup
Age: 37
|
Quote:
As for the encoding side, I've used Besweet&Oggmachine(http://dspguru.notrace.dk/) and OggDropXPd(http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showtopic=15049) and both have worked okay for me. |
|
2003-12-28, 17:01 | Link #18 |
Kiero mi Hanime Gratix™
|
Hi guys...
You're treating MP3 as a whole thing... But there is a lot of difference between different codecs: Xing, LAME, the older linux codecs... etc. And Ashibaka, you say something about speed... There is a phrase in Spanish that says something like "The cheapest, at last is more expensive", I mean, before using lame at full quality, when I had a Pentium 100, time was golden, so I encoded allways with Xing, which is much faster than any other. But man, quality was not so good. When I switched to Linux I used... Mmmhh.. I can't remmember now... blade ? And the quality was even worse. I'm telling you, allways with the same configurations. Then I switched to win again (with a more powerfull machine) and I discovered LAME. It's pretty slow, but it's quality is by far, one of the best (when configured correctly, bitrates, notch frequency, etc...) I haven't tried OGG format yet... Time to time, but I agree with Forse: MP3 has been around here for too long.
__________________
|
2003-12-28, 19:36 | Link #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
I'm one step ahead of you.
Myself, I use CDex's LAME MP3 Encoder with my own personal settings that may be a bit heavy on the file size but sound close enough to perfect.
(insert whacked settings here) LAME has a tweaked VBR setting that is superior to that. In fact, you don't need to deal with any messy bitrate options or doodads. The only option you need is --alt-preset standard. That's it. Nothing more. Use it. Also almost all new made CD/portable mp3 players support ogg. You're joking, right? (Insert OGG technical BS here) I won't even bother with this. |
|
|