Unfortunately I will not be making these presets. I am no longer working on LAME or with the LAME developers. Sorry. This is pretty much due to the endless conflict between the way LAME development currently works and my own ideology on the matter. I'd go more into detail, but I don't think there's much point in that.I believe that JohnV may try to resume some of my work on presets, but you'll have to ask him.
2. I'd want the community to keep testing and giving recommendations for the future Lame presets if alt-preset is dropped. Lame 3.94 brings new quality improvements which need to be checked in the form of new switch testing. 3. This would definitely need the help of the "old gang": HansHeijden,Wombat,ff123,volcano etc.. I'd want that there could be somekind of "community recommendation" also in the future versions of Lame and more active testing. Testing should be done in normal ABX/DBT style and clear reports with original clips should be provided. Everything (every switch) should be justified. "wild style" switch suggestions would not be tolerated. Everything should be done in very systematic way....There.. I'd like to know what people think about this..
Hmm.. I'd hope that people would not follow "my" lead, but there would be some core-group, which would give recommendations..
You can clearly notice, that the 3.94a2 --alt-preset cbr 128 is not optimal anymore at all and 3.90.2 also gives bad quality. I gained very much better results with very simple commandline in 3.94a2 which I didnt even try to tweak at all. This is why new tweaking is needed.
IMO, it will take a strong leader with a good ear and at least a passing knowledge of how the code works to make sure that particular tweaks are tested out thoroughly. Otherwise, it will be hit and miss.
BTW, I think 3.90.2 sound clearly the worst on the sample clip you provided.
Here I provided only alt-preset cbr 128 samples, except the last example uses correctly working q-type (-q0). This shows how much better nspsytune pre-echo handling becomes in 3.94..Heh.. at the same time I figured why Lame 3.93 sounded so bad.. its -q2 at least with cbr nspsytune is broken. Could be that Tak has already figured this out though.
So if you use the VBR alt-presets with 3.94a2, you should use -q0 (overriding the default -q3)?
QuoteSo if you use the VBR alt-presets with 3.94a2, you should use -q0 (overriding the default -q3)?I don't think APS should be used with 3.94a2 at all until somebody has verified it..
The question that comes up in my mind is:Did did the fix that Gabriel made on 3.91 (so that 3.91.1 came out) go into 3.94a2 ?3.93.1 right now has 'returned' to 3.92 quality, as it seems.
There is a major performance difference between -q0 and -q3, the latter is approximately 3x faster.
lame394a2 --nspsytune -V2 -mj --nsmsfix 1.1 -q3 -b112 --lowpass 19 --athtype 4 --ns-sfb21 2 -X0 -Z
QuoteThere is a major performance difference between -q0 and -q3, the latter is approximately 3x faster.Well.. I'd guess that the -q3 issue does not necessary affect vbr.. I also tested 3.94a2 with some nspsytune lines and -q3 seemed quite fine. I haven't tested extensively so I'm not gonna guarantee anything...btw. if you have used 3.94a2 with APS, what kind of bitrates it creates generally compared to 3.90.2 or 3.92?