foo_abx 1.3.4 reportfoobar2000 v1.2.82013/09/16 19:01:08File A: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_2.wavFile B: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_1.mp319:01:08 : Test started.19:01:27 : 01/01 50.0%19:01:34 : 02/02 25.0%19:01:42 : 03/03 12.5%19:02:15 : 04/04 6.3%19:02:49 : 05/05 3.1%19:03:01 : 06/06 1.6%19:03:52 : 07/07 0.8%19:04:06 : 08/08 0.4%19:04:28 : 09/09 0.2%19:04:38 : 10/10 0.1%19:04:51 : 11/11 0.0%19:05:28 : 12/12 0.0%19:05:44 : Test finished. ---------- Total: 12/12 (0.0%)
Not all mp3 encoders are created equally?Have you tried Lame 3.98.4, 3.99.5 or 3.100l?This last one uses VBR which could likely do just as well as 320 CBR (which is true for VBR with the other two versions).Also, don't worry about matching level unless the codec scales as a precaution to prevent clipping on decode to integer. That you get different values is perfectly normal with lossy encoding.
Just downloaded 3.99.5 from RareWares, I'll have to figure out the command line. Thanks for the tip.
Xrecode have a nag screen, but is fully functional if you use the "demo".
The test above was done listening to the opening portion of the clip.
Just in case your program did something funky:Could you convert the "wav file" to 320 kbps (-b 320) using the lame command line. I suggest to use the most default setting possible.While you are it try VBR 0 (-V 0 ).
foo_abx 1.3.4 reportfoobar2000 v1.2.92013/09/16 21:20:02File A: C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\Ravel_Test_File_2_short.wavFile B: C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\Ravel_Test_File_3_short.mp321:20:02 : Test started.21:45:08 : 00/01 100.0%21:45:13 : Test finished. ---------- Total: 0/1 (100.0%)
I don't have the ears (or the equipment?) to ABX that high Can you also try the VBR 0 (eg: -V 0), just a curiosity.EDIT:I'm under the impression that the internals are different enough to merit different results.
Recommended MP3 via LAME, at -b 320 -h
Quote from: UltimateMusicSnob on 16 September, 2013, 11:59:05 PMRecommended MP3 via LAME, at -b 320 -hIs -h actually recommended? For some reason my brain is telling me it's not, but I'll admit to not being totally up on all the LAME switches.
Aliases and removed settings-h Alias of -q 2.[...]-q n Algorithm quality selection For CBR, ABR and --vbr-old modes, the following table applies-q 0 Use slowest & best possible version of all algorithms.-q 3 Default value. Good speed, good quality[...]For the default VBR mode since LAME 3.98, the following table applies-q 0 to -q 4 Use the best algorithm.
I believe there are documented cases where -h resulted in a poorer quality encode
...File A: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_2.wavFile B: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_3.mp3...I'd like to get around the "killer sample" limitation...
Quote from: UltimateMusicSnob on 16 September, 2013, 11:36:46 PM...File A: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_2.wavFile B: C:\Users\KiarkAudio\Documents\Ravel_Test_File_3.mp3...I'd like to get around the "killer sample" limitation...Why is it your mp3 has a different name as the wav? Since you are new in here i have some doubts about your intention and motivation, sorry.You may have only abx'd some hamster fart against the zar bomb.