Skip to main content

Topic: dbpoweramp (Read 4263 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dbpoweramp
I was converted an mp3 file to itunes 10.1.1 but now it does not do it anymore it only encodes with lame and I want to encode it with itunes mp3 converter.

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #1
Can I ask why?

dbpoweramp
Reply #2

  • garym
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #3
Can I ask why? I don't know.



No, he means why you'd want to use the mp3 codec from itunes rather than the LAME mp3 codec included with dbpa.

  • saratoga
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #4
Its not a great encoder so I would not recommend going out of your way to use it.

  • Ouroboros
  • [*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #5
Its not a great encoder so I would not recommend going out of your way to use it.

Are you sure? I know that these results are from 2008, and different (i.e. newer) versions of encoders can be expected to perform differently relative to each other, but they show that iTunes MP3 @ ~128 kbit/s VBR wasn't noticeably different from any of the other encoders at the 95% confidence level.

Having said that, the reverse was also true i.e. LAME wasn't noticeably different either, so there's no good reason to swap from LAME to iTunes.
  • Last Edit: 24 September, 2013, 05:52:45 PM by Ouroboros

  • nu774
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
dbpoweramp
Reply #6
Unlike other codecs such as AAC, Apple's MP3 encoder is implemented in iTunes itself (not in CoreAudio layer). Therefore other Apple softwares such as QuickTime or afconvert don't provide MP3 encoding functionality.
If you really want iTunes MP3 encoder, you have to use iTunes directly or indirectly.

As a latter (indirect) option, you have a CLI application named iTunesEncode, which kicks iTunes via COM interface. I haven't tried it, though.
Read this thread in dBpoweramp forum.

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #7
Its not a great encoder so I would not recommend going out of your way to use it.

Are you sure? I know that these results are from 2008, and different (i.e. newer) versions of encoders can be expected to perform differently relative to each other, but they show that iTunes MP3 @ ~128 kbit/s VBR wasn't noticeably different from any of the other encoders at the 95% confidence level.

Having said that, the reverse was also true i.e. LAME wasn't noticeably different either, so there's no good reason to swap from LAME to iTunes.

Some food for thoughts http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=844018

With this argument I would say at least Helix is better than iTunes MP3.

  • garym
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
dbpoweramp
Reply #8
Based on a post the OP has also made on the dbpa forums, he's trying to convert mp3 to mp3 (and wants to use the itunes codec instead of the lame for some reason).  There's a lot that is not clear here about the OP's objectives/needs.