Please, leave Xing as anchor.
Regarding Lame, it seems to me that your choice is between 3 versions: 3.90.3, 3.93.1, 3.94
IMO, the bottom point is if we want the test results to appeal to newbies or enlightened HA users. If we go for newbies, the test should be CBR. If we go for veterans, the test should be ABR.
About FhG version:I'm inclined to test FhG Current and Legacy Fast from Adobe Audition, both at some VBR mode that comes close to 128kbps (in case we decide to go for VBR). Legacy Slow is - as the name implies - too slow and, from what it is said, fast is actually better (!).
CBR is what newbies use once they start playing with MP3. Only later some of them come to know about VBR and ABR. Also, it's the default mode in most MP3 encoders: Lame, FhG, Xing... (or the only mode in some cases: Radium, Audioactive, iTunes)
I don't agree with you on this point. I think if you're a newbie and you're reading listening test results, that's probably because you want to find out what to use to make your encodings sound as good as possible (with MP3 at that specific bitrate).
If both Legacy Fast and Legacy Slow actually encode with VBR, then they are probably the same codec -- the FhG fast codec, because that's the only one which does VBR.
hmm, what about LAME 3.92 :confused:
FYI, iTunes supports MP3 VBR encoding. Press "Custom" and it'll pop-up a configuration dialog, and you can check "Use Variable Bitrate Encoding (VBR)"
Also EncSpot detects the iTunes files as: FhG (fastenc or mp3enc)
-FhG Audition Current VBR 50-60-Lame 3.90.3 --alt-preset 128-iTunes VBR-Audioactive 2.04 high quality 128kbps CBR-RealOne (Xing) VBR - anchor
Also, since this is a mid-bitrate test, it might be a good idea to replace one or two of the samples with problem cases. Do you agree?
Could a few problem cases skew the total ratings? Problem sample rating differences will probably be larger (as more of the scale is used), and hence have more influence on the overall scores. I am not sure if this is a desired effect.
I'd like to see how much quality was sacrificed for speed with GOGO. IMO it's always been left out in tests, not among the best encoders but not really bad either. Kind of in the middle, almost boring:) The quality is basically (again IMO) estimated (i.e. it SHOULD perform this... and IS LIKELY to sound like that...)
Why don't we test GOGO 3.12 once and for all, and see if it's really not that good in quality? If it's no good, then we can stop talking about it (until an improved version is released).
and mp4pro at 64kbps
guruboolez: iTunes is not for MAC users only - its for PCs, too.