Originally posted by SNYder So then how come --alt is already able to be used in LAME?
And do you ALMIGHT SOMEB0DY think it's fine for me to use --alt-normal over --dm-standard figuring he's done a hand full of stuff that I know are in --alt-normal but I'm not sure about being in --dm-standard? As in, are they the same exactly, and if not and --alt-normal is the latest work by him, is it ok to use that?
I also removed some unoptimized settings, including --r3mix.
Originally posted by layer3maniac Roel's blood pressure probably just shot through the roof... :insane:
Originally posted by SNYder I think a link under the 96kbps CBR or whatever should be a link to a thread or a page with information on why LAME should not be used and where to get a good fhg encoder/program that would provide better quality at these bitrates. Mabey even have a little explanation on how to get the best quality outa fhg using whatever program
Originally posted by SNYder fyi: u have --alt-preset insane under vbr.
--abr 95 -mj -h --athtype 2 --nspsytune --ns-bass -8 --resample 32 --lowpass 15.5 --scale 0.95
Originally posted by Dibrom I did that on purpose actually, but since it is a little bit confusing I added a small note underneath explaining why it is there.
Originally posted by jraneses Dibrom, can you comment on the differences between using the --dm-preset xtreme from the 12/01 build and the new --alt-preset extreme on the latest build.
I've encoded an album tonight using both encoders and noticed with --alt-preset extreme that my file sizes are jumping up around 3/4 mb each.
I'm not really concerned, but what quality differences can I expect between these two different presets? If the new alt presets are going to give me better quality (even if it's inaudible to me), I want to make sure I go with the new ones. I haven't been able to find a good FAQ on exactly what the new presets are supposed to offer overall over the old dm presets.
Originally posted by Dibrom Areas where the --alt-preset likely improves upon your setting, --scale .95 is too conservative to eliminate the majority of audible clipping (testing by myself and ff123 on bloodline.wav) and I also think an --ns-bass value of -8 is probably too high for that bitrate, allocating too many bits to that region. Too high of an --ns-bass value with low bitrates impacts the quality of higher frequencies, and I think that --ns-bass -8 at 128kbps may be a tad too aggressive in that regard already. I have noted slight differences in cymbal sounds with that high of a value even at 128kbps cbr as opposed to using a lower --ns-bass value. This situation should be worse at a lower bitrate.
Originally posted by Northpack You are fairly right, that in the case of encoding music this setting would be too high, but as I read on various DivX boards, the value of -8 is recommended for movie soundtracks because of the heavy bass-effects in most soundtracks. compared to that high-frequencies claimed to be rather disregardable!? Then again, that was claimed in conjunction with an --abr134 line, so perhaps it makes sense to put in down to, say -6 in this case?
Whether using --alt-preset < 100, is the waveform going to be downsampled to 32 khz? I think I am able to point out an audible difference in quality between a sampling-rate of 44 and 32, whereas 32 sounds clearly better in my ears at such low bitrates...
Another question, Dibrom: as you have replaced now the initial --dm-preset with the new --alt-preset switch, is --dm-metal gone or has it it made into the the new switch?
Originally posted by john33 Dibrom,I notice the rlo presets file for RazorLame is somewhat out-of-date.I would have a go myself, but I suspect I would probably get it wrong!john33
Originally posted by Dibrom Hrmm.. that's a pretty big jump in bitrate. What kind of music was this? I actually have an idea what might be causing this bitrate increase in this mode now that you mention it. I'll have to double check. Maybe you could encode again adding the switch --no-preset-tune and see what that does to the bitrates...
Originally posted by jraneses It's hip hop on this particular album. With the no-preset-tune switch, the bitrate dropped down to 248 from it's original 267. The encode using dm-preset xtreme is averaging 248 also. Like I said, if that jump in bitrate is doing some good to the quality, I'll definately be happy with it.
Any thoughts are appreciated...thanks for awesome work on the encoder.