Skip to main content

Topic: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings (Read 275695 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Reply #250
I know what's joint stereo, and that it allows better bitrates, I just don't like the idea of not having two clearly separated channels.

In that case, you obviously don't know what Joint Stereo is. As Kornchild says, please read up on it (from reputable sources) and find out what it actually is.

Cheers, Slipstreem. 

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Reply #251
I know what's joint stereo, and that it allows better bitrates, I just don't like the idea of not having two clearly separated channels. I'd prefer to use simple stereo and end up with songs bigger in size, I don't care about the difference in size.


As previously suggested (by myself and Slipstreem), go back and read up on what joint stereo is as you obviously have no idea what it actually does.  That is alright as I don't know the technical aspects behind joint stereo, I just know that it is lossless.

So, if I'm right, the information in that table is wrong, 270 is way more than 210 kbps.
Is there something I don't know? Or it is supposed to be out of the 170-210kbps range?


No, the information in the table is correct.  The bitrates you see listed are to be used as a guide, they are not set in stone.  The -V 2 setting won't yield results that fall absolutely between the range of 170-210 kbps.  The listed bitrates are there just to guide people so that they can approximately determine file sizes.  Hard rock and metal will yield much higher bitrates, this is normal.  The reason why the bitrates vary is because the different -V values are used for quality settings.  -V 2 will yield the exact same quality regardless of bitrate.  In other words, some songs may require a higher bitrate at that quality level than others.  Don't use the bitrates listed as a Bible.  Instead, use them as a guide.

FLAC to LAME V4 is the same as FLAC to LAME V2 to LAME V4 ?


No.  FLAC to Lame is the same thing as CD to Lame.  FLAC to Lame -V 2 to Lame -V 4 is a process known as lossy-to-lossy transcoding.  You probably want to avoid this at all costs.  In other words, converting FLAC to Lame at -V 4 will yield higher results than converting FLAC to -V 2 and then -V 2 to -V 4.  The reason being is that you are taking that mp3 file (of which does not contain all of the information that the FLAC file does) and further reducing its bitrate and amount of information.  Think of it like making a photo copy of a photo copy or taking a picture of a painting.  The resulting picture won't have nearly the same quality as the source painting.*

LAME 320 CBR to 192 CBR is the same as LAME 320 CBR to LAME 256 CBR to LAME 192 CBR ?


No.  Again, you are adding an extra step that isn't needed.  Going from 320 to 256 and then to 192 will, in my opinion, result in a great deal of quality loss.  You would be better off going from 320 directly to 192.  You aren't going to add any quality by going down to 256 first and then to 192, you will only reduce the quality.*

*I used my past ABX tests to formulate my opinions.

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Reply #252
Talking about transcoding is NOT on-topic.

Because this topic is centered around an older version of Lame I'm closing this discussion.
  • Last Edit: 15 May, 2009, 11:53:43 AM by greynol
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.