List of recommended LAME settings

Topic: List of recommended LAME settings (Read 656133 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #300 – 2003-12-10 11:18:43

Quote

Hi!
Please, tell me how I can set stereo for Lame 3.93 MMx in foobar2000's conversion options.
I have default joint stereo.

Thank You.
Geo.

I guess you don't know it, but joint stereo is better than full stereo. You will not lose any stereo image by using joint stereo, you will only imporve quality. Check the FAQ.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #301 – 2003-12-10 11:29:28

Joint stereo is better than stereo so leave this option as it is.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #302 – 2003-12-10 16:10:48

Quote

jin, if you use user defined encoder, you need to add %s %d to the commandline, like in this picture.

hmm, i dont have this set in my EAC compression options, and mine seems to be working alright.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #303 – 2003-12-10 16:15:25

Quote

Quote
jin, if you use user defined encoder, you need to add %s %d to the commandline, like in this picture.

hmm, i dont have this set in my EAC compression options, and mine seems to be working alright.

nevermind i now see that its not set on user defined encoder anymore, but on LAME encoder in the EAC scroll down box option. does this setting still have EAC locate my 3.90.3 in my c:\ folder? or is this lame compile already built into EAC this time or what?

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #304 – 2003-12-10 16:15:44

Quote

Joint stereo is better than stereo so leave this option as it is.

it would quite be fine if you tell that this is YOUR opinion, or if you tell that it is better in MOST KNOWN cases. would be really great, as i cannot enjoy joint stereo files the way you do. :-)

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #305 – 2003-12-10 16:57:27

Quote

Hi!
Please, tell me how I can set stereo for Lame 3.93 MMx in foobar2000's conversion options.
I have default joint stereo.

Thank You.
Geo.

Don't do so. It will crash presets if you gonna use them. And even if you don't go to use them I still don't recommend to use stereo mode.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #306 – 2003-12-10 17:24:57

Quote

Quote
Joint stereo is better than stereo so leave this option as it is.

it would quite be fine if you tell that this is YOUR opinion, or if you tell that it is better in MOST KNOWN cases. would be really great, as i cannot enjoy joint stereo files the way you do. :-)

Do what you want to do. But don't state that Stereo is better than JS,because it isn't true (only crappy encoders like Xing mess up with JS). If you read the FAQs of this site you will always read that the "safe" implementation of JS in Lame renders it the best way to encode the audio.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #307 – 2003-12-10 18:26:14

Fr4nz,

you might like to join us again in joint stereo vs. true stereo without just trolling about PLACEBO. you may have a personal opinion like all others here, like me... but still it remains what it is ... YOUR OPINION, the opinion of the HA users, the words that are written in the FAQ... or anything else states so far or any personal meaning of a group of people... but claiming it IS better should everyone check for itself. and maybe there are some sidefacts we all havent noticed so far.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #308 – 2003-12-11 14:16:29

Maybe you should prove in a reliable manner that JS does sound worse, even for you. That would support your claims better.

Edit: ok, I read the thread you limked. Still, the problem would be just in a surround system, not a stereo system.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #309 – 2003-12-11 14:44:59

MxM, in that thread you tested using joint stereo in a surround system, right? As it was stated there, there can be problems with JS in systems using DSP, like in a surround system for instance.

As for JS in a normal listening setup, headphones or 2-speakers, there is no problems whatsoever with JS as it is implemented in Lame. As far as i know no one has yet been able to show a sample where JS would be worse than plain stereo. There are however numerous samples where JS outperforms plain stereo in quality.

So would you please consider testing JS against full stereo with standard headphones before you continue making these general claims.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #310 – 2003-12-11 16:10:03

did i claim anything for real ? ...instead i should consider that normally im completely wrong here... i did not aimed to get that in depth into mp3 again. ;-)

this is a list of recommendation, and so it should be ....focussed on whats to be recommended.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #311 – 2003-12-21 16:50:36

Hi all. I just would like to know if "--preset" equals "--alt-preset".
Here is what the help file from LAME V3.93.1 says:

Quote

--preset use built-in preset
--alt-preset use updated and much higher quality "alternate" presets

But when asking lame.exe for help about --alt-presets (from command line), it mentions only "--preset".
Here is a copy/pasted extract:

Quote

For example:

"--preset fast standard <input file> <output file>"
or "--preset cbr 192 <input file> <output file>"
or "--preset 172 <input file> <output file>"
or "--preset extreme <input file> <output file>"

So does "--preset" actually have the same effect as "--alt-preset"?

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #312 – 2003-12-21 18:05:17

In 3.93.1, they mean exactly the same thing.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #313 – 2003-12-21 19:52:07

Thanks. Wasn't that the case in previous previous versions?

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #314 – 2003-12-21 21:03:40

Quote

Thanks. Wasn't that the case in previous previous versions?

no, until 3.93 you had to use --alt-preset. well, except on the special 3.90.3 compile available on rarewares.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #315 – 2003-12-24 06:56:44

What is currently the best 320 kb CBR command line option?

I thought it was --alt-preset insane (320 kbit/s CBR, highest possible quality)

and then I read about

--nspsytune -b320 -h -mj --nssafejoint --lowpass 20 --athtype 2 -X3 (This will be the upcoming new "--dm-preset insane")

but the latter doesn't work for me...it just rips the song to a WAV...

??

THANKS!

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #316 – 2003-12-24 07:01:06

Quote

What is currently the best 320 kb CBR command line option?

I thought it was --alt-preset insane (320 kbit/s CBR, highest possible quality)

and then I read about

--nspsytune -b320 -h -mj --nssafejoint --lowpass 20 --athtype 2 -X3 (This will be the upcoming new "--dm-preset insane")

but the latter doesn't work for me...it just rips the song to a WAV...

??

THANKS!

I am still pretty sure --alt-preset insane is the best. Where did you read about this other command line?

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #317 – 2003-12-24 07:41:31

Quote

I am still pretty sure --alt-preset insane is the best. Where did you read about this other command line?

It's on page 1 of this thread...about 3/4 of the way down...

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #318 – 2003-12-24 09:02:24

Quote

--nspsytune -b320 -h -mj --nssafejoint --lowpass 20 --athtype 2 -X3 (This will be the upcoming new "--dm-preset insane")

The dm-presets where renamed to alt-presets long ago, so this command line is pretty old. Ignore this recommendation and keep using --alt-preset insane.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #319 – 2003-12-31 04:17:40

Using wapet.exe via Exact Audio Copy, is this a decent command-line?

%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" -t "Encoded_by=My name here" lame.exe --alt-preset extreme -c --space-id3v1 %s %d

Any recommendations and/or suggestions would be appreciated, of course.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #320 – 2004-01-06 06:11:44

I use the --preset extreme setting also, but I add -b32 -B320 to the list. I don't really want to compress silence down to 128kbit. It'd be a waste.

I'd like to thank TrNSZ for showing me the "preset" settings and preventing myself from making more fsck'd up MP3's using --r3mix.

Using Exact Audio Copy v0.95pb4 [http://www.exactaudiocopy.de]
and LAME v3.94b1

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #321 – 2004-01-06 10:09:57

Simba7, --preset extreme (as well as standard) drops bitrate down to 32kbps on silence automatically. No need to add -b 32 - you'll only get some < 128kbps frames on *audible* content which can lead to audible problems. There were problem samples that were solved by setting min. bitrate *on non-silent content* to 128kbps, that's why this is included in the --presets.

So far almost no listening tests have been published about lame 3.94b1. If you use it there's a much higher probability that you run into audible artifacts than with the well-tested recommended version 3.90.3.

If you read a bit throught this thread you'll notice that there's a consensus about what the 'recommended Lame settings' are - and people read it (especially the beginning), ask questions that remain open and get answers. This consensus is based on a huge ammount of time spent on scientific tests and will change if new facts based on evidence appear.

If everyone who doesn't have enough knowledge yet to know what he's doing, posted his favourite settings based on assumptions here, this thread would turn into a complete mess and lose its purpose.

So please ...
- don't post things as facts that are based on potentially wrong assumptions
- if you have still questions feel free to ask them
- if you have performed double blind tests (ABX) and found that the settings you use are better, your input will be more than welcome, ideally in a separate thread

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #322 – 2004-01-06 15:28:44

It does? From what I've seen on LAME v3.94b1, the bitrates are from 128kbit to 320kbit. There's no 32-112kbit in there. Unless it's different on the newer LAME builds.

So far, the only thing -b32 does IS compress the silence down (and just that) to acceptible levels. The actual "Audible" content falls between 128-320kbit. Very rarely I'll get a frame lower than 128kbit with audible content.

Of course, this is still a beta. Is it going to go RELEASE soon, or should I go back to 3.93.1 (unless there's a custom build somewhere)?

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #323 – 2004-01-07 08:08:32

Simba7: First, 32 kbps frames are only used on digital silence IIRC, are you sure there are digital silence in the files you have examined? Second, 3.94b1 is beta and things may have changed and things may be buggy. You really shouldn't be using it. The recommended build is still 3.90.3 and you should use the recommended settings.

You say that you get <128 kbps frames very rarely for audible content. So it obviously happens for you. The reason for restricting it to >128 kbps is to assure "perfect" quality, which is the whole point of the standard, extreme & insane presets. The VBR algorithms sometimes underestimates the bitrate needed for encoding a certain passage, and to assure that this underestimation does not affect quality to much the bitrate has been restricted to min 128. Removing this restriction allows the encoder to use too low bitrates every now and then and thereby causing artefacts.

If you can accept non-"perfect" quality in these rare occasions when you get a <128 frame for audible conten, I can't see why you use the extreme preset. It should be overkill for you and a waste of diskspace.

If you still want to use the extreme preset, have you checked how much diskspace you actually save by adding -b32? It should be very little, so why mess with the optimal settings? In fact, it could be quite possible that -preset standard would deliver better quality than -preset extreme -b32 but at a lower bitrate.

And finally, these recommended settings have been tested so thoroughly that you can't believe it. Using them (and only them) is the currently best you can do with the MP3 format.

In short, use lame 3.90.3 and presets only for best quality.

EDIT: There doesn't seem to be a stable release of 3.94: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=170199 (again, stay away fron alpha and beta versions...)

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #324 – 2004-01-08 09:38:46

Roger that.. Why not 3.93.1, though?

Notice