Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

2002-06-10 15:27:33

Im not that new to mp3 in general but new to lame... just discovered it... and wow is it good... (i was using Xing! AARRGGHH!)... Now i use EAC and Lame v3.92 MMX Using razorlame. I did a bit of research using all these forums etc and i was convinced that the --r3mix preset was the best for quality. Now im not sure. People say now that --alt-preset standard is the way to go. So? which is the way to go? which is better for quality and which is better for filesize... I dont care too much about filesize. I care about the quality. But im not gonna use a preset that adds an extra meg or so for a quality increase thats barely audible.

on another note, how do i conduct those blind listning tests... is there a program i can download? Thanks!

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #1 – 2002-06-10 15:37:11

If you want quality, then alt-preset standard is the way to go. Usually somewhere around 180-220 in bitrates (192 average for me). This preset has some code tweaks that make it able to handle tougher music without as many problems as --r3mix has.

--r3mix is good if you want lower bitrates, but you will sacrifice some quality.

Everyone here will suggest --alt-preset standard. I suggest you use it as well, since it doesn't add much more to the bitrate, but it greatly increases quality (to my ears anyways). I've been using it ever since I got my MP3 CD player a month ago and it sounds great, the best sounding MP3's I've ever heard and I used to be a long-time user of --r3mix.

There is an ABX program that will test you on which file sounds best to you (or which one sounds worse). I don't have a link handy, but someone I am sure will post it.

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #2 – 2002-06-10 15:39:11

www.pcabx.com for ABX software

Cheers
AgentMil

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #3 – 2002-06-10 16:18:39

Cheers. I will do some blind tests soon. And i will be using --alt-preset standard from now on. I can't believe that i was using xing for soo long. Listing to my older mp3s shows the loss in quality compared to my latest lame encodes. Ill be re-encoding my cd collection with lame now! Take a while but worth it. Ill also be keeping my tabs open for mp+ and ogg as these formats look very promising. All we need is for some more hardware players to support these filetypes.

Thanks again for your advice and the quick reply! its good to know that people on the other side of the world from me are willing to help!

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #4 – 2002-06-10 17:42:36

Not everyone here is from the other side of the world  (mind you I didnt offer any input........I'll get my coat... )


ps; good choice on using Lame, now spread the word to your friends

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #5 – 2002-06-10 18:17:10

OT:

Germany on the other side of the world? Strange. Do you perhaps live in a parallel universe

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #6 – 2002-06-10 19:53:10

yes please do spread the word Lame Mp3's & .mpc.

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #7 – 2002-06-11 19:46:50

I will spred the word... i can't beleve even now how poor xing is... bad stereo, ringing, artifacts.... none with lame! Ogg and mpc, well ive fiddled with them and they both sound excellent... just needs some hardware support and native winamp support (mpc that is, ogg is standard now).

Oh, when i made that post about the otherside of the world; the only ppl whod replyed lived in the usa and australia! and no, im not in a parallel universe! (or maybe i am, us brits have that reputation dont we?)

Lame v3.92 MMX Best Setting? --r3mix or --alt-preset standar

Reply #8 – 2002-06-11 20:18:18

"(or maybe i am, us brits have that reputation dont we?)"

not over here!