Originally posted by Case * Files with PNS are marked as SV 7.1 to prevent confusion with old decoders * URL for download displayed on unknown StreamVersions * Bug fixes in XMMS * mppenc now needs less bitrate while at least maintaining the quality * smart help screens for mppenc * Changed overwrite behavior of mppenchttp://www.uni-jena.de/~pfk/mpp/
Originally posted by AgentMil I do seem to recall that one of the features of StreamVersion 8 was the reduction of bitrates via better Huffman coding. So IMHO Frank might be using this as a method of beta testing the method out. Correct me if I am wrong I did a search for streamversion and huffman but came out empty. I am not to sure but offering an opinion for whats its worth CheersAgentMil
Originally posted by mithrandir Unfortunately, I am relying completely on subjective perception but it seems to me that mppenc 1.04 doesn't quite sound as good as 1.02 in the higher frequencies. There seems to be an "edge" to some of the high frequency transients that I don't remember hearing before. Hard to describe and harder to prove.
Originally posted by Dibrom For what it's worth, I'm not saying there isn't a difference, I haven't had time to really listen for myself.. I'd just like to see a constructive examination if there is going to be one, rather than just speculation. I'm tired of seeing other people jump to conclusions about something based on what may be pure speculation.. it happens all the time with MP3 and the --alt-presets (remember the joint stereo stuff?)....
It almost seems as if he is hiding something.
Originally posted by Jan S. I say I would rather have him programming his great encoder instead of having to answer what he did to cut of 1%-3%.
Originally posted by cmagicAlbum : Tina Turner - Simply The Best (best of)Track : River Deep Mountain High ( it' a pretty old recording)mppenc 1.01j --standard (no tweaks) --> 133 kbpsmmpenc 1.04 --standard (no tweaks) --> 85 kbps mppenc 1.04 --xtreme (no tweaks) --> 95 kbps
Originally posted by Dibrom Hrmm.. do you actually have a desire to prove this?Just curious, cause it almost sounds like you don't want to try or something. If you can't prove it though, then wouldn't you be inclined to believe it was only a placebo effect? So then why would it be worth mentioning ahead of time?
Originally posted by -=Ducky=- What I'm wondering is, if there wasn't any reduction of bitrates would anyone be doing those listening "tests"??I personally always upgrade my encoder to the newest one and encode all my albums further with that with the same profile I always use.I never really listen for differences as I always expect that it will be the same quality or better.But I recently also encoded some albums with the new 1.04 and I'm getting a bit worried when I saw those bitrate reductions and some experiences of other users over here.
Originally posted by Dibrom I wouldn't really be worried at this point. Nobody has actually said that they "can" hear a difference for sure. So far, all I'm seeing is speculation. And the bit about inverse mixing is really useless as far as quality indication goes. The best encoder possible would sound flawless but would look horrible in a spectrogram... so you can't really tell anything from those unless you listen beforehand.
Originally posted by cmagic I made a few test with mppenc 1.04 and one of them is strange to me.Album : Tina Turner - Simply The Best (best of)Track : River Deep Mountain High ( it' a pretty old recording)mppenc 1.01j --standard (no tweaks) --> 133 kbpsmmpenc 1.04 --standard (no tweaks) --> 85 kbps mppenc 1.04 --xtreme (no tweaks) --> 95 kbps As far as my hearing goes, the new (1.04) --standard and --xtreme ar as good asthe previous ones (1.01) and I 'm aware that this is an old recording with limited bandwithbut the sudden drop in bitrate really makes me wonder...So what has really changed from 1.01 to 1.04 ?
Originally posted by Frank Klemm Reducing bitrate from 133 kbps to 85 kbps should be audible, isn't it?Try to find out what happened. Be a detective!