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: Recording quality impact on Lame APS (Read 3938 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Hello,

I have a number of "older" jazz CD's, that when ripped with EAC-Lame APS end up encoded at a constant 128 kbps.  I wouldn't think that the recording quality should have this kind of effect.

Some of the CD's claim to be remastered, some don't. 

Most of my CD's end up just fine, but it doesn't make sense to me why I end up with an effectively constant bit rate on some of these.

Thanks for any help

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #1 –
I believe 128 CBR is the LAME default (ie. if you don't set any switches).

Therefore, I think you've made an error in your command line so that the switches have been ignored and the default setting used by LAME (or maybe you've used an old version where APS wasn't implemented?).

Make sure you use the double hyphen at the start, ie.  --alt-preset standard.

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #2 –
That's just it.  I did nothing different between one that ended up @ 128 and one that came out with the expected variation.

I have all my log files saved from EAC if you need proof. 

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #3 –
It's not actually CBR, it's just VBR with all the frames at 128.

When using an --alt-preset, LAME encoded the frames at bitrates between 128 and 320.
For some reason, it thought that 128 would suffice.

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #4 –
Quote
I have all my log files saved from EAC if you need proof. 

LOL.  Not necessary - only trying to help.

I think Justinj88 has the right answer.  LAME just didn't need more bits than 128.  Seems logical for the source material.

Regards
DrD

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #5 –
sure they're not actually mono tracks? that'd do it.

<edit> it should be safe to use --alt-preset standard -b80 on mono material, as per other threads

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #6 –
Hmm, interesting thought. 

Uh, is there an easy way to tell if a song is mono or stereo other than just having good hearing. 

Thanks.

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #7 –
Quote
Hmm, interesting thought. 

Uh, is there an easy way to tell if a song is mono or stereo other than just having good hearing. 

Thanks.

Yes.  Find any audio editing program, select either the right or left channel, and choose "invert/flip" or "invert phase."  Then use the channel converter to combine them into one channel.

If virtually all of the music disappears, it's a mono track.

BTW, 99% of the frames APS used for "The Anthology of American Folk Music" were 128kbps, and I cannot ABX it.  I bet you're fine.

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #8 –
Did a quick check on one of them, sure enough - mono. 

This is exactly the answer I was looking for.  Thanks everyone for your help!
 

Recording quality impact on Lame APS

Reply #9 –
I have a question.
I also have some old songs in mono and they were encoded in 128Kbs when I used aps standard. But I was surprised-there were no jointet blocks. Why did that happen?
Ogg Vorbis for music and speech [q-2.0 - q6.0]
FLAC for recordings to be edited
Speex for speech