Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Do i really have to use vbr? (Read 13073 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Do i really have to use vbr?

My problem is i have denon dj cd players they can play vbr mp3s but with limited functionalty i need to use cbr. I was thinking if i rip my cds to cbr 192 will people notice it on the dancefloor?

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #1 –
Unless you possess extremely good speakers and other equipment I very much doubt anyone will be able to notice anything at 128Kbps or even lower considering the background noise at clubs.

To encode in CBR using LAME you should use the following parameter in the commandline: -b 128

(this is for 128 Kbps files but I'm sure that if you need 192Kbps files you can work out what to change    )

AliL

Edit: I've found out that if you just select lame.exe with no parameters it automatically defaults to 128Kbps so there's no need to add the "-b 128" parameter. You would only need to if you wanted something like 192Kbps.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #2 –
Quote from: robojock on
My problem is i have denon dj cd players they can play vbr mp3s but with limited functionalty i need to use cbr. I was thinking if i rip my cds to cbr 192 will people notice it on the dancefloor?

No, people will not notice, if you use LAME. See the recommended settings for cbr.
Note, that you can use cbr 320 kbps, just to be on the safe side.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #4 –
do the different genres also play a roll on the bitrate? Because i do different genres for different occasions.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #5 –
Personally I'd have thought 320Kbps is a tad overkill not to mention a bit heavy on the amount of hard disk space used up. But if you'd feel safer using 320Kbps, you should used the parameter: "--preset insane" (without the quotation marks). This has been optimised for the best quality files in the VAST majority of circumstances and I'd say you'd be included in there as well.

If you're not going to go the "insane" route, I suggest that you add the "-h" parameter to your commandline as well as this results in higher quality files at the sacrifice of encoding speed but if you're using a modern computer then this shouldn't be an issue. I use a 5 year old laptop and I still get encoding speeds of about 17x.

Hope this helps.

AliL

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #6 –
Quote from: kjoonlee on
If you're in a real pinch, you can try adding padding to MP3 frames to make the files CBR:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=32379

Omion's MP3 repacker is for making files smaller, but you can make files bigger as well.

i know about it, but i am trying to get as much mp3s on the disc as i can without going to "low" on the quality

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: robojock on
My problem is i have denon dj cd players they can play vbr mp3s but with limited functionalty i need to use cbr. I was thinking if i rip my cds to cbr 192 will people notice it on the dancefloor?
Most likely they won't. Even if at some tracks was a well audible difference to the original, people will not know this cause what they do is by far not an abx test.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #8 –
Thanks for the replies guys. BTW you guys are damn quick, i am still typing and i have replies without knowing it. I thought i would have to wait a few hours before getting a reply.
There is a catch though to all of this, i also want to keep these mp3s for personal use. What do u suggest.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #9 –
Well if you're going to keep the files for personal use I suggest that you do an ABX test first on the equipment that you have so that you're happy with the quality of the files before you use them on the dancefloor, because there's no point in re-ripping if you don't need to.

If you want a program that can do ABX tests I reccommend foobar2000.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #10 –
If the personal use you speak of doesn't exclude the use of VBR then I'd personally recommend VBR at -V3.

Cheers, Slipstreem. 

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #11 –
Quote from: AliL on
Personally I'd have thought 320Kbps is a tad overkill not to mention a bit heavy on the amount of hard disk space used up. But if you'd feel safer using 320Kbps, you should used the parameter: "--preset insane" (without the quotation marks). This has been optimised for the best quality files in the VAST majority of circumstances and I'd say you'd be included in there as well.

If you're not going to go the "insane" route, I suggest that you add the "-h" parameter to your commandline as well as this results in higher quality files at the sacrifice of encoding speed but if you're using a modern computer then this shouldn't be an issue. I use a 5 year old laptop and I still get encoding speeds of about 17x.

Hope this helps.

AliL

For any recent version of lame, --preset insane and -b 320 are one and the same. Also, -h is the default.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #12 –
cbr 320 kbps way to go

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #13 –
Quote from: ZinCh on
cbr 320 kbps way to go

i was thinking about ripping at that bitrate, but then i thought about how many dj sites that sell cbr 192 mp3s.
In the end all i want to do is rip my music for myself and for djing. If i have to use 320 then i will but if it is not needed and i can use 192 then i would prefer that birate.
I have done many abx tests but failed all of them even at 128, unless it is really crap quality or a multiple transcoded mp3.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #14 –
Quote from: robojock on
Quote from: ZinCh on

cbr 320 kbps way to go

i was thinking about ripping at that bitrate, but then i thought about how many dj sites that sell cbr 192 mp3s.
In the end all i want to do is rip my music for myself and for djing. If i have to use 320 then i will but if it is not needed and i can use 192 then i would prefer that birate.
I have done many abx tests but failed all of them even at 128, unless it is really crap quality or a multiple transcoded mp3.


From what I hear Id say CBR 192 is a good compromise. I doubt anyone will be able to hear any differences compared to a cd, especially in a club... And since you can abx @ 128 I think you are on the safe side for personal use as well  Good Luck!

/Kef

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #15 –
Although I can abx most lame 128 cbr encoding, the real world difference is not normally huge, but can still be too annoying for my taste and I never use use cbr 128. For a noob abxer its not that easy not to mention a typical clubber ! so you have little to worry about 128 k lame. It will not sound lossy unless it meets a really difficult sample.

For more security go for 160 cbr but no more !

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #16 –
so i will also be safe with 192 for personal use?

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #17 –
i'd say encode at cbr 256kbps. you know the quality will be damn and with a slightly smaller file size compared to 320kbps

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #18 –
Quote from: robojock on
so i will also be safe with 192 for personal use?


Heh, you've gotten many different replies all from 128 up to 256 kbps. I'd still say 192 is a good compromise. And as you say yourself, many of the dj sites sells downloadable content at 192. Why not just follow their example? Sure, 256 or 320 is better quality, but if you can't ABX yourself at 128 why go to such extremes?

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #19 –
If there's nothing physically stopping you from encoding and playing back in VBR for your own personal usage then it seems a bit silly not to really. LAME is very well tuned as a VBR encoder and should produce better results at an average bitrate of 128Kbps than CBR will at a fixed bitrate of 128Kbps.

I personally have trouble ABX-ing VBR at -V3 which seems to come out at around 160Kbps with the kind of music you're talking about with LAME 3.98 Beta7. -V5 may be sufficient for you personally and that seems to sit around 130Kbps for the same encodings. Either have the opportunity to use 320Kbps blocks as and when the encoder deems necessary without bloating the final filesize, so it doesn't seem to make much sense to deliberately strangle the encoding engine by forcibly limiting it to anything lower in my opinion.

Cheers, Slipstreem. 

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #20 –
Clubs are such a dirty listening environment (reverb, way too much bass, blown speakers etc) that i really don't think it matters. 128 is probably fine. Anyhow people aren't doing critical listening here... it'll still sound "good" to the crowd, just subtle things like cymbal crashes might potentially not be as crisp.

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #21 –
@ Jebus: The OP has shifted topic and is now asking for advice on settings to use for his own personal listening pleasure, not for use in a club environment.

Cheers, Slipstreem. 

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #22 –
in your situation... i'd use 192kbps cbr


later

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #23 –
I would use 192kbps with Joint Stereo for CBR, which makes a dramatic improvement from 128kbps, expect Blade encoded mp3s  . Which also has a great combo of file size and sound quality, just like V 2 VBR or preset standard VBR does if you used VBR.
"I never thought I'd see this much candy in one mission!"

Do i really have to use vbr?

Reply #24 –
192 is good, but doesn't have the trigger mechanism for pre echo like vbr tuning... Expect V3 / V2 to have better handling of pre echo.