HydrogenAudio

Lossy Audio Compression => MP3 => MP3 - General => Topic started by: dev0 on 2005-03-12 15:15:35

Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-03-12 15:15:35
Sine LAME 3.97b1 has been released very recently, here's a preliminary version of the new recommended settings thread (aka. --aps is dead). It's not finished yet and some stuff, which remains to be cleaned up is the collection of links and the EAC instructions.

The old thread will always be available here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28124).

This is a request for comments. Suggestions and questions are welcome.
--------------------------------------------------------



Updated 2005-03-12

These settings require Lame 3.95 or later.  Lame 3.97 found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html) [fixme] to download).

Note:  At a given bitrate range, the quality scale usually works to where VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (CBR < ABR < VBR in terms of quality).  The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).


-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------

-V2 is generally considered transparent... [fixme]

[fixme: add note about vbr-new]

-V 2 (~190 kbit/s, typical 170 ... 220)

-V 1 (~210 kbit/s, typical 200 ... 250)

-V 0 (~240 kbit/s, typical 220 ... 270)


Custom settings:
-V n
Example: -V 4 . The range goes from 9 (worst) to 0 (best).
A detailed dicussion over the target bitrates can be found here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18091).


Update: Completely revamped the whole thread to accomodate the new recommended version (3.97).



-------------------------------------------------
Recommended ABR (average bitrate) settings:
-------------------------------------------------

--abr <bitrate>
Example:
--abr 200


-------------------------------------------------
Recommended CBR (constant bitrate) settings:
-------------------------------------------------

-b <bitrate>
Example:
-b 192


-------------------------------------------------
Setting up EAC for lame.exe with tagging
-------------------------------------------------
Based on Case's tutorial (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/EAC/)

Select compression options from EAC menu.
Open 'External Compression' tab.

  1. Check 'Use external program for compression'
  2. Change 'Parameter passing scheme' to 'User Defined Encoder'
  3. Set file extension to .mp3
  4. Click 'Browse' and locate 'lame.exe'
  5. Change 'Additional command line options' to one of the following commandlines
  6. Check 'Delete WAV after compression'
  7. Uncheck 'Add ID3 tag'

Quote
ID3v1:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v1-only --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v1 and ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

APEv2: (requires wapet.exe (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/files/wapet.zip))
%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" lame.exe -V 2 --vbr-new %s %d

(You can change -V 2 to any setting/preset you'd like to use)

These commandlines are generally recommended over EAC's own tagging routines and its LAME encoder parameter passing preset, which is known to cause problems.
The bitrate setting serves a cosmetic purpose and is used for the size display in EAC's main window.

-------------------------------------------------
Useful links
-------------------------------------------------

(Latest LAME compiles)
Dmitry's compiles (http://mitiok.cjb.net/)
Rarewares.org MP3 section (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html)

(MP3 Information sites)
Hydrogen Audio (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org)
Decoder test by David Robinson (http://mp3decoders.mp3-tech.org/)

(MP3 Forums)
Hydrogenaudio MP3 forum (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&act=SC&c=9)



(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/)
Tutorial for EAC (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/tutorials.htm)
EAC forum (http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php3?forumid=14)


(LAME Frontends)
RazorLame (http://www.dors.de/razorlame/)
ALL2LAME (http://members.home.nl/w.speek/all2lame.htm)

HeadAC3he by Dark Avenger : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 (http://darkav.de.vu)
BeSweet by DSPGuru : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 with batch-possibility (http://dspguru.notrace.dk/index.html)


(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend (http://home.wanadoo.nl/~w.speek/tag.htm)
Helium2 (http://www.helium2.com/)
Renatager (http://www.renatager.de/)
MPTagger (http://surf.to/mptagger)
More tagging information & programs (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=64962)
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs (http://www.gdsoftware.dk/)
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection (http://mac.sourceforge.net/)



(MP3 Gain) - lossless gain change / "normalizing"!
Official site (http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/)
Basic Guide to avoid clipping (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=3274&s=)


(How to)
Burn an MP3 CD (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=4052)
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/)  : Try Monkeys Audio http://www.monkeysaudio.com/ (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/), or maybe better: foobar 2000, use the CLI encoder: http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html (http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html)
MPC -> MP3 by MPCxchange (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=3008)


(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot (http://www.guerillasoft.nstemp.com/EncSpot2/index.html)
ff123's artefact training (http://www.ff123.net/training/training.html)
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests (http://www.pcabx.com/)
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening (http://ff123.net/)
Training of musically listening good-ear.com (http://www.good-ear.com/servlet/EarTrainer)
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com (http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm)
MP3Utility (http://www.geocities.com/mp3utility/)

QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files (http://www.quicksfv.org/)


[color=royal blue]-------------------------------------------------
Credits
-------------------------------------------------[/color]

A big thanks to all LAME developers for making one kickass MP3 codec.

People who took part in suggesting the different settings:
Dibrom, r3mix, ff123, Hans Heijden, kjempen, Benjamin Lebsanft, GeSomeone, Wombat.

Creation of the alt preset system and related special code level quality enhancements:
Dibrom, with technical assistance from Robert Hegemann and Naoki Shibata and extensive tuning help and quality verification via listening tests from JohnV and also initial help (--dm-preset era) from Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, and others.  Test clips, bitrate information, and further listening tests provided by TheBashar, zbutsam, Pio2001, BadDuDeX, r3mix, h, TarX, Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, Filburt, Volcano, Garf, MrDrew, TrNSZ, nyaochi, Amadeus93, in no particular order, and many, many others I (Dibrom) probably forgot to mention.. (msg me to be added)

Idea (also exposing the need for a unified preset system), Original post and list of original settings collected by: user
Layout and additional work by: CiTay, SNYder, Dibrom, dev0
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-12 06:48:43
Comments will be moved into a seperate thread once LAME 3.97 is released and this takes the place of the old thread.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: saratoga on 2005-09-12 07:41:52
I'm really glad to see this.  I have great results with 3.97 alphas, and I think its time that it be recommended.  Compared to other codecs, the sheer amount of testing/refinement its recieved makes it more then stable/safe enough to recommend IMO.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: teleguise on 2005-09-12 07:54:43
I know this is all prelim still but the :
Quote
Updated 2005-03-12

These settings require Lame 3.95 or later. Lame 3.97 found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here to download).


... link results in a 404 Page Not Found.

Edit: And tada... its now fixed 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: shrinkmail on 2005-09-12 08:29:49
thanks all.
now things will finally start looking intelligent for a noob visiting HA for advice. 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Frank Bicking on 2005-09-12 08:34:26
Comments and suggestions:

1. The current version lacks an explanation about what happened to the (alt-)presets. This is going to be among the first things people are going to ask about, as they might wonder if and why they have been replaced, if they were possibly dropped for quality reasons, and if they can still use them without worrying. Explain that normal parameters and presets are based on the same code and thus equal, and show some examples about how they correspond to each other, the more complete, the better.

2. Either explain why -V 0 is yellow or remove the coloring. I agree to educate people about the unlikelihood of increasing the quality with higher settings, but if they nevertheless want to have higher bitrates for whatever reason, this use of colors might cause uncertainty, and people might be going to ask there is anything wrong with -V 0 or -V 1.

3. --vbr-new. I don't know if there is a general consensus about if it increases the quality throughout all bitrates, if the developers are going to make it default, and if it should be recommended here for some or all -V settings at all. But as it has played a decisive role during the alpha testing, this parameter should be addressed here. I'm sure you will come up with an unbiased explanation like "--vbr-new encodes faster and has been proven to be able to achieve a higher quality in blind listening tests".

For my German forum AudioHQ, I compiled a table with all recommended settings (http://www.audiohq.de/index.php?showtopic=52&view=findpost&p=92), feel free to use it as an inspiration.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-12 10:41:56
Quote
-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------
[-V0; -V1; -V2]

Recommended for what? It's not precised. For transparency I suppose. But what about -V3 then? I suppose that for most people, -V3 (and maybe even -V4) produce transparent encodings.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: jaybeee on 2005-09-12 11:20:55
Quote
These settings require Lame 3.95 or later.  Lame 3.97 found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html) [fixme] to download).

I reckon it will be better to have LAME 3.97 first on a line of it's own: it'll make it stand out clearer, that 3.97 is the recommended one.  Then have another line saying that the following settings require 3.95 or above.

Quote
Custom settings:
-V n
Example: -V 4 . The range goes from 9 (worst) to 0 (best).
A detailed dicussion over the target bitrates can be found here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18091).

Isn't the table in the wiki better? here (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME).  Might have to be careful with the refs to the presets on this page though??
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kjoonlee on 2005-09-16 07:34:07
Quote
The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think it would be better to mention -b 320 instead of --api.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: magic75 on 2005-09-16 08:13:20
I agree with guru. I think presets below V2 should be recommended as well.

How about something like this:
---

In terms of quality VBR is better than ABR which is better than CBR.

VBR is recommended when quality is the most important. VBR produces files with constant quality but with a varying bitrate, usually within certain limits. Recommended VBR settings:
-V0 [insert target bitrate range here]
-V1 [as above]
-V2 [as above] - usually transparant for most [recommended transparant setting]
-V3 [as above]
-V4 [as above]
-V5 [as above] - a good 128kbps CBR replacement
-V6 [as above]
-V7 [as above]
-V8 [as above]

ABR is recommended when file size predictability is important. The file produced is still VBR but the final bitrate usually ends up within +-5(?) kbps from target bitrate. Recommended ABR setting:

-abr target_bitrate

CBR is recommended when constant bitrate is required troughout the file, eg. streaming etc.?

-abr bitrate

---
The text above is just a quick sketch...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Yaztromo on 2005-09-16 08:14:25
Quote
Quote
The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think it would be better to mention -b 320 instead of --api.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327192"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I was just going to say. Preset insane being the highest quality possible needs a mention.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: markanini on 2005-09-16 10:22:55
Guruboolez should get credits for his listening tests of the 3.97 alphas.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Vietwoojagig on 2005-09-16 10:40:38
Quote
(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/)
Tutorial for EAC (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/tutorials.htm)
EAC forum (http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php3?forumid=14)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535")
Link to EAC forum is not ok. Try this:
[a href="http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php?forumid=14]EAC forum[/url]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Vietwoojagig on 2005-09-16 10:49:10
Quote
(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend (http://home.wanadoo.nl/~w.speek/tag.htm)
Helium2 (http://www.helium2.com/)
Renatager (http://www.renatager.de/)
MPTagger (http://surf.to/mptagger)
More tagging information & programs (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=64962)
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs (http://www.gdsoftware.dk/)
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection (http://mac.sourceforge.net/)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535")
Tag + Tag Frontend has moved. try this:
[a href="http://members.home.nl/w.speek/]Tag + Tag Frontend[/url]

MPTagger URL does not work

Please add:
ID3-TagIt (http://www.id3-tagit.de/)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gecko on 2005-09-16 11:19:58
A small section of "What NOT to do" would help people avoid common (and understandable) errors.

Example:
-q0 : Actually, I'm nut sure about this one. Supposedly the bugs have been fixed in one of the alphas. But this is the first switch someone will mess around with.

-k : Encodes normally inaudible high frequencies but sacrifices overall quality and causes bitrate bloat.

--ns-bass etc.: These parameters are allready optimal. No need for further adjustment.

I'm sure there are detailed threads in the FAQ wich could be linked to for extra information.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 11:43:22
I support Frank Bickings request (similar to some co-poster here), that not only the high-bitrate presets should be "recommended" here.
The target of the Topic was clearly, to have an overview about the best quality (and speed?!, people want to know always about speed, consider mentioning --vbr-new, it seems, that vbr-new gives also better/same quality, maybe because more tuned recently) settings for a given bitrate (range).

So, we could simply write each -V x setting to topic, with the expected bitrates.
Then below a second table, with explanation of making abr, then cbr encodes.

It would be very similar to the table Frank Bicking made for the Germans.
Maybe somewhere an addition, if intermediate values between eg. -V 4 and maybe -V 3 are possible (not necessary, if technically not possible), like -V 3.5 or -V 3.3 or whatever.


Parameter      | entsprechendes (translation: corresponding) Preset  | Bitrate
---------------+------------------------+-----------------
-b 320        | --preset insane        |    320 kbps CBR
-V 0 --vbr-new | --preset fast extreme  | 245…285 kbps VBR
-V 0          | --preset extreme      | 245…285 kbps VBR
-V 1 --vbr-new |                        | 220…260 kbps VBR
-V 2 --vbr-new | --preset fast standard | 170…210 kbps VBR  (empfohlen (translation: recommended)
-V 2          | --preset standard      | 170…210 kbps VBR
-V 3 --vbr-new |                        | 155…195 kbps VBR
-V 4 --vbr-new | --preset fast medium  | 145…185 kbps VBR
-V 4          | --preset medium        | 145…185 kbps VBR
-V 5 --vbr-new |                        | 110…150 kbps VBR
-V 6 --vbr-new |                        |  95…135 kbps VBR
-V 7 --vbr-new |                        |  80…120 kbps VBR
-V 8 --vbr-new |                        |  65…105 kbps VBR
-V 9 --vbr-new |                        |  45…85 kbps VBR
--abr xxx      | --preset xxx          |    xxx kbps ABR
-b xxx        | --preset cbr xxx      |    xxx kbps CBR



And I suggest, we/I edit simply the existing topic about recommended settings, as we don't need 2 topics. The topic was always edited to keep it uptodate.
If we think, we keep content of old topic for history, then the content can be copied to a history topic.
Most important reason about editing the existing thread:
Otherwise the links in world wide web would break down to the recommended lame-mp3 settings thread.
And that would be contra-productive in spreading the knowlwedge of this community and best Lame to the people out there.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: shadowking on 2005-09-16 12:03:55
I think the common *quality* presets should be listed:

-Vx (VBR quality level...x=0-9 .. 0 highest, 9 lowest)

--vbr-new (For faster vbr encoding)

Example:  -V2 --vbr-new


Recommended settings:

-V2 (High Quality  ....170-220k)**
-V1 (High Quality+....200-250k)
-V0 (High Quality+....230-280k)

** This preset is generaly transparent on most music

For near-transparent playback ideal for portable & car players:

-V4 (Medium-High quality - 140-180k)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Vietwoojagig on 2005-09-16 12:38:52
Quote
(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot (http://www.guerillasoft.nstemp.com/EncSpot2/index.html)
ff123's artefact training (http://www.ff123.net/training/training.html)
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests (http://www.pcabx.com/)
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening (http://ff123.net/)
Training of musically listening good-ear.com (http://www.good-ear.com/servlet/EarTrainer)
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com (http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm)
MP3Utility (http://www.geocities.com/mp3utility/)
QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files (http://www.quicksfv.org/)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535")
URL of Encspot is outdated. Try this:
[a href="http://www.guerillasoft.co.uk/encspot/]EncSpot[/url]

Please add
Mr QuestionMan (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=5)

Please add somewhere
Burrrn (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=4)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: moozooh on 2005-09-16 13:29:06
I think that only the essential information must be mentioned here, everything else (e.g. bitrate corresponding tables, switches explanation) must already be at the wiki article(-s) (with the appropriate links, of course).

Quote
Guruboolez should get credits for his listening tests of the 3.97 alphas.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327224"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My exact thoughts.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 13:37:24
[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']last version of topic with 3.90.3[/span]
to keep for evaluation & history eg.




[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Recommended settings for Lame version 3.90.x:[/span]

Last update 2004-09-25

These settings require Lame 3.90 or later.  Lame 3.90.3 found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/show.php/act/ST/f/15/t/478) to download).
LAME 3.95.1 and later use a new VBR preset system, which is discussed in more detail here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18091).

Note:  At a given bitrate range, the quality scale usually works to where VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (CBR < ABR < VBR in terms of quality).  The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).


Discussion has been moved here. (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=203&st=0#entry1596)


-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------

--alt-preset standard (~190 kbit/s, typical 180 ... 220)

--alt-preset fast standard (~190 kbit/s, faster but potentially lower quality)

--alt-preset extreme (~250 kbit/s, typical 220 ... 270)

--alt-preset fast extreme (~250 kbit/s, faster but potentially lower quality)

--alt-preset insane (320 kbit/s CBR, highest possible quality)

For high quality on portable MP3 players, you may use --alt-preset medium (around 160 kbit/s). The medium preset is only available in the modified LAME3.90.3 (http://www.rarewares.org/files/mp3/lame-3.90.3modified.zip).


Update: -Z added. Read this thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=16&t=7783) for more.
Update: -Z removed again; included within --alt-preset standard/extreme with the new 3.90.3 compile (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=478&).




-------------------------------------------------
Recommended [span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%']ABR (average bitrate) settings:[/b]
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

ABR Setting tuned from 320 kbps down to 8 kbps

--alt-preset <bitrate>

Example:
--alt-preset 200


128 kbit ABR

--alt-preset 128

There was developed an alternative to the  --abr 128 preset:
ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html)):
--abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93
Different people have different tastes regarding artefacts and their behaviour of annoyance, so try out yourself --abr 128 vs. --abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93


-------------------------------------------------
Recommended [span style='font-size:10pt;line-height:100%']CBR (constant bitrate) settings:[/b]
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

320 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 320

note: --alt-preset cbr 320 is the exact same thing as --alt-preset insane


256 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 256


192 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 192


160 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 160


128 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 128

or ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html)):

-h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93


96 kbit/s CBR

--alt-preset cbr 96



-------------------------------------------------
Setting up EAC for lame.exe with tagging
-------------------------------------------------
Based on Case's tutorial (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/EAC/)

Select compression options from EAC menu.
Open 'External Compression' tab.

  1. Check 'Use external program for compression'
  2. Change 'Parameter passing scheme' to 'User Defined Encoder'
  3. Set file extension to .mp3
  4. Click 'Browse' and locate 'lame.exe'
  5. Change 'Additional command line options' to one of the following commandlines
  6. Check 'Delete WAV after compression'
  7. Uncheck 'Add ID3 tag'

Quote
ID3v1:
--alt-preset standard --id3v1-only --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v2:
--alt-preset standard --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v1 and ID3v2:
--alt-preset standard --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

APEv2: (requires wapet.exe (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/files/wapet.zip))
%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" lame.exe --alt-preset standard %s %d

(You can change --alt-preset standard to any setting/preset you'd like to use)

These commandlines are generally recommended over EAC's own tagging routines and its LAME encoder parameter passing preset, which is known to cause problems.
The bitrate setting serves a cosmetic purpose and is used for the size display in EAC's main window.



[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']
-------------------------------------------------
Useful links
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

(Latest LAME compiles)
Dmitry's compiles (http://mitiok.cjb.net/)
www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm (http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm) or Rarewares MP3 page (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html)

Dibrom's compile 3.90.3 for evaluation & history purposes (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28123)


(MP3 Information sites)
Hydrogen Audio (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org)
Decoder test by David Robinson, link overthere out of function, who can give url ? (http://www.david.robinson.org/papers.html#mp3)

(MP3 Forums)
Hydrogenaudio MP3 forum (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showforum=55)



(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/)
Tutorial for EAC (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/tutorials.htm)
EAC forum (http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php3?forumid=14)


(LAME Frontends)
RazorLame (http://www.dors.de/razorlame/)
EasyLAME (german)  url off, who can give url ? (http://www.mpex.net/software/details/easylame.html)

HeadAC3he by Dark Avenger : (5.1) ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 (http://darkav.de.vu)
BeSweet by DSPGuru : (5.1) ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 with batch-possibility (http://dspguru.notrace.dk/index.html)


(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend (http://home.wanadoo.nl/~w.speek/tag.htm)
Helium2 (http://www.helium2.com/)
Renatager (http://www.renatager.de/)
MPTagger (http://surf.to/mptagger)
More tagging information & programs (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=64962)
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs (http://www.gdsoftware.dk/)
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection 2.92, but who can offer the download link to latest MAC 2.93 here inside of HA ?! (http://mac.sourceforge.net/)



(MP3 Gain) - lossless gain change / "normalizing"!
Official site (http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/)
Basic Guide to avoid clipping (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=3274)


(How to)
Burn an MP3 CD (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=4052)
Burrrn (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=4)
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/)  : Try Monkeys Audio http://www.monkeysaudio.com/ (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/), or maybe better: foobar 2000, use the CLI encoder: http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html (http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html)
Foobar basic guide at www.High-Quality.ch.vu (http://www.angelfire.com/magic2/hq-audio/l/foobar-short-guide.html)
MPC -> MP3 by MPCxchange (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=3008)


(Analyzing MP3)
Mr QuestionMan (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=5)
EncSpot (http://www.guerillasoft.co.uk/encspot)
ff123's artefact training (http://www.ff123.net/training/training.html)
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests (http://www.pcabx.com/)
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening (http://ff123.net/)
Training of musically listening good-ear.com (http://www.good-ear.com/servlet/EarTrainer)
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com (http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm)
MP3Utility (http://www.geocities.com/mp3utility/)
QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files (http://www.quicksfv.org/)


[color=royal blue]-------------------------------------------------
Credits
-------------------------------------------------[/color]
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']
A big thanks to all LAME developers for making one kickass MP3 codec.

People who took part in suggesting the different settings:
Dibrom, r3mix, ff123, Hans Heijden, kjempen, Benjamin Lebsanft, GeSomeone, Wombat.

Creation of the alt preset system and related special code level quality enhancements:
Dibrom, with technical assistance from Robert Hegemann and Naoki Shibata and extensive tuning help and quality verification via listening tests from JohnV and also initial help (--dm-preset era) from Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, and others.  Test clips, bitrate information, and further listening tests provided by TheBashar, zbutsam, Pio2001, BadDuDeX, r3mix, h, TarX, Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, Filburt, Volcano, Garf, MrDrew, TrNSZ, nyaochi, Amadeus93, in no particular order, and many, many others I (Dibrom) probably forgot to mention.. (msg me to be added)

Idea (also exposing the need for a unified preset system), Original post and list of original settings collected by: user
Layout and additional work by: dev0, CiTay, SNYder, Dibrom[/span]


And finally...

[span style='font-size:9pt;line-height:100%']Thank you ALL in the community for making it what it is, providing interest and discussion and helping to work towards the most concise, well tuned, and most thought out MP3 quality "paradigm" seen yet!  -- Dibrom[/span]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 14:26:29
[span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%']Major update with Lame 3.97:[/span]




Updated 2005-09-16






These settings require Lame 3.97 or later.  Lame 3.97beta1 (beta=b) found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm) or Rarewares (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html) to download).
Do not use alpha (a) versions ! Those are for testing purposes, if you want.

Note:  At a given bitrate range, the quality scale is following: VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (VBR > ABR > CBR in terms of quality).  The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']VBR: variable bitrate mode, the goal is to keep a constant quality and saving bits where possible without lowering the quality.
ABR: average bitrate mode varies bits around a specified target bitrate
CBR: constant bitrate mode is not efficient regarding distributing bitrate to more complex music parts and saving bits where it would be possible without lowering the quality of those music parts.
Note: all modes and settings mentioned in this topic belong to the specifications of the MP3 standard, and the resulting MP3s should be played by every standard-conform MP3-Decoder. If this shouldn't be the case, blame the manufacturer or developer of your MP3-Decoder/device. Neither the hydrogenaudio.org community, HA staff, nor the authors of this post take any responsibility for anything.[/span]

Discussion has been moved here. (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=203&st=0#entry1596)






[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

The settings, presets are listed beginning with highest possible quality stepping down to lower qualities:

Code: [Select]
Switch            equals preset        target kbit/s  Bitrate range kbit/s

-b 320          = --preset insane        320 CBR    320
-V 0            = --preset extreme       240      245…285
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240      245…285
-V 1                                     210      220…260
-V 1 --vbr-new                           210      220…260
-V 2            = --preset standard      190      170…210
-V 2 --vbr-new  = --preset fast standard 190      170…210
-V 3                                     175      155…195
-V 3 --vbr-new                           175      155…195
-V 4            = --preset medium        165      145…185
-V 4 --vbr-new  = --preset fast medium   165      145…185
-V 5                                     130      110…150
-V 5 --vbr-new                           130      110…150
-V 6                                     115       95…135
-V 6 --vbr-new                           115       95…135
-V 7                                     100       80…120
-V 7 --vbr-new                           100       80…120
-V 8                                      85       65…105
-V 8 - vbr-new                            85       65…105
-V 9                                      65       45…85
-V 9 - vbr-new                            65       45…85



If the target is eg. [span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']streaming[/span] , where you need MP3 in ABR or even CBR mode, there are still the ABR and CBR modes.
You can specify your desired target bitrate:

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']ABR = Average Bitrate mode:[/span]

--abr xxx    = --preset xxx       

xxx (desired averaged bitrate in kbit/s) can be any value between 8 - 320 , like eg. 9, 17, 80, 128, 133, 200 etc.

Only for 128k ABR:
There was developed an alternative to the  --abr 128 preset:
ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html)):
--abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93
Different people have different tastes regarding artefacts and their behaviour of annoyance, so try out --abr 128 vs. --abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93


[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']CBR = Constant Bitrate mode:[/span]

-b xxx                = --preset cbr xxx        

xxx (desired bitrate in kbit/s) can be only:  8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 64 , 80 , 96 , 112 , 128 , 160 , 192 , 256 or 320








[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Remarks:[/span]
the --vbr-new switch enables the new VBR mode. Lame will encode much faster compared to old/default vbr mode. Current knowledge qualitywise comparing vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artefact, which is worse in --vbr-new compared to default. Though the general impression is, that --vbr-new should be recommended over vbr-default.
The presets -V 0 , -V 1 , -V 2 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. [span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](transparent = most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in an ABX blindtest)[/span]
For high quality on portable MP3 players, you may use -V 4 (--vbr-new)= --preset (fast) medium (around 165 kbit/s).
-V 5 --vbr-new is a very good replacement for 128 kbit/s encodings.

The revolutionary --alt-preset system introduced in lame 3.90, is replaced nowadays by the preset system, which is already substituted by the above explained settings system.
You don't need to worry, if you select nowadays in lame 3.97 either --alt-preset xy , preset xy or corresponding switch xy, you will always get the same.
E.G.: --alt-preset cbr 320 is the exact same thing as --alt-preset insane etc.:
--alt-preset insane = --preset insane = -b 320 = --preset 320 = --preset cbr 320








[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']-------------------------------------------------
Setting up EAC for lame.exe with tagging
-------------------------------------------------[/span]
Based on Case's tutorial (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/EAC/)

Select compression options from EAC menu.
Open 'External Compression' tab.

  1. Check 'Use external program for compression'
  2. Change 'Parameter passing scheme' to 'User Defined Encoder'
  3. Set file extension to .mp3
  4. Click 'Browse' and locate 'lame.exe'
  5. Change 'Additional command line options' to one of the following commandlines
  6. Check 'Delete WAV after compression'
  7. Uncheck 'Add ID3 tag'

Quote
ID3v1:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v1-only --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v1 and ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

APEv2: (requires wapet.exe (http://www.saunalahti.fi/~cse/files/wapet.zip))
%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" lame.exe -V 2 --vbr-new %s %d

(You can change -V 2 --vbr-new to any setting/preset you'd like to use)

These commandlines are generally recommended over EAC's own tagging routines and its LAME encoder parameter passing preset, which is known to cause problems.
The bitrate setting serves a cosmetic purpose and is used for the size display in EAC's main window.

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']
-------------------------------------------------
Useful links
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

(Latest LAME compiles)
Dmitry's compiles (http://mitiok.cjb.net/)
Dibrom's compiles (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=478&s=)
Rarewares.org MP3 section (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html)

(MP3 Information sites)
Hydrogen Audio (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org)
Decoder test by David Robinson (http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~djmrob/mp3decoders/contents.html)

(MP3 Forums)
Hydrogenaudio MP3 forum (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&act=SC&c=9)



(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site (http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/)
Tutorial for EAC (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/tutorials.htm)
EAC forum (http://www.digital-inn.de/forumdisplay.php3?forumid=14)


(LAME Frontends)
RazorLame (http://www.dors.de/razorlame/)

EasyLAME (german) (http://www.mpex.net/software/details/easylame.html)

HeadAC3he by Dark Avenger : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 (http://darkav.de.vu)
BeSweet by DSPGuru : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 with batch-possibility (http://dspguru.notrace.dk/index.html)


(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend (http://home.wanadoo.nl/~w.speek/tag.htm)
Helium2 (http://www.helium2.com/)
Renatager (http://www.renatager.de/)
MPTagger (http://surf.to/mptagger)
More tagging information & programs (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=64962)
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs (http://www.gdsoftware.dk/)
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection (http://mac.sourceforge.net/)



(MP3 Gain) - lossless gain change / "normalizing"!
Official site (http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/)
Basic Guide to avoid clipping (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=3274&s=)


(How to)
Burn an MP3 CD (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=4052)
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/)  : Try Monkeys Audio http://www.monkeysaudio.com/ (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/), or maybe better: foobar 2000, use the CLI encoder: http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html (http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html)
MPC -> MP3 by MPCxchange (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=11&t=3008)


(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot (http://www.guerillasoft.nstemp.com/EncSpot2/index.html)
ff123's artefact training (http://www.ff123.net/training/training.html)
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests (http://www.pcabx.com/)
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening (http://ff123.net/)
Training of musically listening good-ear.com (http://www.good-ear.com/servlet/EarTrainer)
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com (http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm)
MP3Utility (http://www.geocities.com/mp3utility/)

QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files (http://www.quicksfv.org/)


[color=royal blue]-------------------------------------------------
Credits
-------------------------------------------------[/color]
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']
A big thanks to all LAME developers for making one kickass MP3 codec.

People who took part in suggesting the different settings:
Dibrom, r3mix, ff123, Hans Heijden, kjempen, Benjamin Lebsanft, GeSomeone, Wombat & GuruBoolez for his immense testing.

Creation of the alt preset system and related special code level quality enhancements:
Dibrom, with technical assistance from Robert Hegemann and Naoki Shibata and extensive tuning help and quality verification via listening tests from JohnV and also initial help (--dm-preset era) from Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, and others.  Test clips, bitrate information, and further listening tests provided by TheBashar, zbutsam, Pio2001, BadDuDeX, r3mix, h, TarX, Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, Filburt, Volcano, Garf, MrDrew, TrNSZ, nyaochi, Amadeus93, in no particular order, and many, many others I (Dibrom) probably forgot to mention.. (msg me to be added)

Idea (also exposing the need for a unified preset system), Original post and list of original settings collected by: user
Layout and additional work by: dev0, CiTay, SNYder, Dibrom[/span]


And finally...

[span style='font-size:9pt;line-height:100%']Thank you ALL in the community for making it what it is, providing interest and discussion and helping to work towards the most concise, well tuned, and most thought out MP3 quality "paradigm" seen yet!  -- Dibrom[/span]




the links sections needs to be completely overhauled, eg. add those:

Quote
Quote
(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot (http://www.guerillasoft.nstemp.com/EncSpot2/index.html)
ff123's artefact training (http://www.ff123.net/training/training.html)
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests (http://www.pcabx.com/)
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening (http://ff123.net/)
Training of musically listening good-ear.com (http://www.good-ear.com/servlet/EarTrainer)
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com (http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm)
MP3Utility (http://www.geocities.com/mp3utility/)
QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files (http://www.quicksfv.org/)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=281535")
URL of Encspot is outdated. Try this:
[a href="http://www.guerillasoft.co.uk/encspot/]EncSpot[/url]

Please add
Mr QuestionMan (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=5)

Please add somewhere
Burrrn (http://www.burrrn.net/?page_id=4)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327253"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kritip on 2005-09-16 14:34:31
Comment --- Do you have to use the work F****ing in bold red letters in the first post of the thread???!!!

Kristian
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 15:35:32
So, the 1st draw of the new recommended settings post is finished, I dare to say.

I haven't checked the link list though, that work will follow later.

Maybe Citay or others can improve the layout, wording furthermore.
You will find some new texts by me, I think, they explain, what a newbie to mp3 needs to get a quick start to lame.

is anything important forgotten to mention ?
What about functionality of eg. -V 2.5 , or are those values impossible ? (well, I don't need them, preset system offers all, one could imagine, when i compare to 3.90 or even older...)

The main new dev of lame 3.97, who did a lot of work after 3.90, is Gabriel, or am i wrong ?
He should be mentioned in the credits, if so ?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-16 16:27:01
Quote
The main new dev of lame 3.97, who did a lot of work after 3.90, is Gabriel, or am i wrong ?
He should be mentioned in the credits, if so ?

"New LAME dev since 6 years" 
I think that other Lame devs did a lot of behind the scene work which is very important.
So just mention Lame devs generically (wich is perhaps not that usefull as it seems obvious that Lame devs developped Lame), or mention every people who contributed to Lame (see http://lame.sourceforge.net/doc/html/contributors.html (http://lame.sourceforge.net/doc/html/contributors.html) and http://lame.sourceforge.net/developers.html) (http://lame.sourceforge.net/developers.html)).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: CiTay on 2005-09-16 16:41:29
Quote
Comment --- Do you have to use the work F****ing in bold red letters in the first post of the thread???!!!

Kristian
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327282"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That's a valid remark, i've removed that word.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: shrinkmail on 2005-09-16 17:34:24
Thanx citay for removing the f word. Errm, it would have made the thread look somewhat juvenile.
My suggestion is to have as few links on the main post as possible. It should mainly deal with the recommended settings. There should be a separate wiki page purely for useful links, it is cluttering up the page.
The focus would be on lame and the recommended settings, prominent mention to the testers at HA eg. guruboolez , developers eg. Gabriel .
I really don't think there's any point in putting up Case's tutorial word for word, while a link would suffice.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: JunkieXL on 2005-09-16 18:18:34
I dunno I found Case's tutorial pretty helpfull when I first started using EAC & LAME.  And I've had to quote from that portion of the guide several times when people have had questions about tagging or additional command line options...Might as well leave it.
J
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-16 18:18:42
i think we should start simple, and then continue adding more info for the ones needing it ... if the post is too long, people don't care ... maybe a "quick explanation as first post", and a "long explanation" as the following one.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 19:44:28
please have some patience, the link section will be cleaned up, too, so that everything you need is there, and hopefully working.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: onthejazz on 2005-09-16 19:52:12
Quote
i think we should start simple, and then continue adding more info for the ones needing it ... if the post is too long, people don't care ... maybe a "quick explanation as first post", and a "long explanation" as the following one.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327331"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is smart, I like this idea very much.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: jaybeee on 2005-09-16 20:20:40
Not sure if it's been mentioned or already linked to (didn't see it), but this (http://home-12.tiscali-business.nl/~tpm54044/) EAC guide and info is very useful.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: ErikS on 2005-09-16 21:42:57
Code: [Select]
Switch            equals preset        target kbit/s  Bitrate range kbit/s

-V 0            = --preset extreme       240      245…285
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240      245…285
-V 1                                     210      220…260
-V 1 --vbr-new                           210      220…260


Does this mean that the encoder misses the target bitrate when using V0 and V1?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-16 21:52:45
Quote
Code: [Select]
Switch            equals preset        target kbit/s  Bitrate range kbit/s

-V 0            = --preset extreme       240      245…285
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240      245…285
-V 1                                     210      220…260
-V 1 --vbr-new                           210      220…260


Does this mean that the encoder misses the target bitrate when using V0 and V1?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327387"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



lol, good question !
Now i don't need to ask it myself
I merged the infos from the German audio-hq page with the infos given here.
Indeed, something needs correction there.

The update is mostly done, I went through all links, and pointed out the missing ones  , where you could help me.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-16 22:53:26
Quote
Only for 128k ABR:
There was developed an alternative to the --abr 128 preset:
ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html):
--abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93

Please, this should go.
Those settings were related to 3.90 and results with 3.97 could be quite suboptimals.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kurtnoise on 2005-09-17 00:05:39
May I suggest to add a BeLight link in association with BeSweet ? My tool uses the LameUI recommended by Gabriel. Thanks.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: AtaqueEG on 2005-09-17 02:58:48
This is major! This is so exciting!

I sincerely thought the "Recommended" thread would never change.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: skelly831 on 2005-09-17 03:37:48
Quote
This is major! This is so exciting!

I sincerely thought the "Recommended" thread would never change.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327455"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is major, we are witnessing a paradigm shift, a revolution, it's like life on other planets being found, a religion being proven true... I went overboard  .
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: teleguise on 2005-09-17 08:31:15
Are  there plans to make use of EAC's "Lame MP3 Encoder" parameter passing scheme
work like it did before, -basically- the same as User Defined when using presets?

Presently,  using Lame 3.97b1 only works properly when trying to use presests such as V 2 and V 2 --vbr-new using EAC's User Defined parameter passing scheme.

Does that depend on changes to EAC as well as LAME?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-17 08:37:00
The parameters passing scheme did not changed on the Lame side.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: teleguise on 2005-09-17 08:55:37
Well I guess I should have noted that I never did use either w/Lame 3.90.

So then I take it since nothing changed on Lame's side that it will be up to EAC to change and
interpret v 2 --vbr-new etc.. like it used to do with --alt-preset standard etc..
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: moozooh on 2005-09-17 16:12:18
Here, I've tried to improve user's guide by correcting and lightening it a bit (I still think that the lighter is the better in this case). Markup is changed a bit, too.
Opinions and corrections are appreciated, of course.
—————————————————————————————

These settings require Lame 3.97 or later.  Lame 3.97beta1 (often referenced as 3.97b1) found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm) or Rarewares (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html) to download).
Avoid using alpha (a) versions, those are mainly for testing purposes.

Note: At a given bitrate range, the quality scale is following: VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (VBR > ABR > CBR in terms of quality).  The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--preset insane).

[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']• VBR: variable bitrate mode, the goal is to keep a constant quality and saving bits where possible without lowering the quality.
ABR: average bitrate mode varies bits around a specified target bitrate
CBR: constant bitrate mode is not efficient regarding distributing bitrate to more complex music parts and saving bits where it would be possible without lowering the quality of those music parts.

Note: all modes and settings mentioned in this topic belong to the specifications of the MP3 standard, and the resulting MP3s should be played by every standard-conform MP3-Decoder. If this shouldn't be the case, blame the manufacturer or developer of your MP3-Decoder/device. Neither the hydrogenaudio.org community, HA staff, nor the authors of this post take any responsibility for anything.[/span]

Discussion has been moved here. (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=203&st=0#entry1596)




[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------[/span]

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Presets[/span]
(listed beginning with highest possible quality stepping down to lower qualities)

--preset insane (or -b 320)
maximum quality possible, very high bitrate (always 320 kbps).

--preset extreme (or -V0)
exceptionally high quality, somewhat high bitrate (typically 220—270 kbps).

--preset fast extreme (or -V0 --vbr-new)
allows faster encoding and a bit higher quality than normal --preset extreme (typically 220—270 kbps).

--preset standard (or -V2)
generally transparent preset, almost indistinguishable from --preset extreme, good size/quality tradeoff (typically 180—240 kbps).

--preset fast standard (or -V2 --vbr-new)
allows faster encoding and a bit higher quality than normal --preset standard (typically 180—240 kbps).

--preset medium (or -V4)
mostly transparent preset, extremely suitable for noisy environments and portable use, very good size/quality tradeoff (typically 110—170 kbps).

--preset fast medium (or -V4 --vbr-new)
allows faster encoding and a bit higher quality than normal --preset standard (typically 110—170 kbps).

You can also experiment with other quality settings (such as -V1 or -V3), which are thoroughly described here: [here goes the link to the appropriate wiki part]


If the target is eg. [span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']streaming[/span], where you need MP3 in ABR or even CBR mode, there are still the ABR and CBR modes.
You can specify your desired target bitrate:

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']ABR (Average Bitrate mode):[/span]

--preset xxx or --abr xxx (e.g.: --preset 136, --abr 80)     

xxx (desired averaged bitrate in kbit/s) can be any value between 8—320 (e.g. 9, 17, 80, 128, 133, 200 etc.).

Note: You could also try this popular setting as an alternative to 128 kbps ABR:
-V5 --vbr-new --athaa-sensitivity 1

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']CBR (Constant Bitrate mode):[/span]

--preset cbr xxx or --b xxx (e.g.: --preset cbr 96, -b 160)

Note: Allowed values for CBR (in kbps):  8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 64, 80, 96, 112, 128, 160, 192, 224, 256, 320.

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Remarks:[/span]

About the new VBR mode (also referenced as --vbr-new)
The --vbr-new switch enables the new VBR mode. Lame will encode much faster compared to old/default vbr mode. Current knowledge qualitywise comparing default vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artifact, that shows up in --vbr-new compared to default. Though the general impression is, that --vbr-new should be recommended over vbr-default.
The presets from -V0 to -V3 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. (That means, most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in a double blindtest)

For example, high quality for portable MP3 players may be achieved using -V4 --vbr-new / --preset fast medium (around 150 kbps).

About the old preset system (also referenced as --alt-presets)
The revolutionary --alt-preset system introduced in lame 3.90, is replaced nowadays by the new preset system, explained here: [link to the wiki part blah-blah…]
Note: now you must type in --preset instead of alt-preset).

Though there will be nothing wrong if you select either --alt-preset xy, preset xy or corresponding switch xy, you will always get the same [umm, not sure on the alt-preset part] (e.g: --alt-preset cbr 320 = --alt-preset insane = --preset insane = -b 320 = --preset 320 = --preset cbr 320).

[tutorials and useful links — I think they should be moved to wiki]

[credits — the same?]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-17 16:34:16
I will implement as much as I can from your suggestions, though the links part or the small Case EAC&mp3-lame setup is important.
The sticky topic is useless, if you tackle only the meaning of the settings.
The aim is still, to give the (quick-)start for a newbie towards mp3-compression and ripping his CDs to mp3 of course, all at 1 URL, 1 place in internet.
The name of the topic was years ago chosen as "recommended settings", because at r3mix forum times, we haven't had presets. Then the r3mix & dm-presets came, cumulating to alt-presets and what we have now. The idea to collect widely accepted best settings for a given bitrate, and later to make  a end-user friendly preset system inside of lame, came from those days.
So, at those very early days, even if you understood how to use EAC, you were very unsure about best quality settings, as in the r3mix forum everybody posted his own findings and ideas, suggestions, ABX tests sometimes.
For this reason, the VBR preset system by simply typing -V x (--vbr-new) is a great great progress again.
And so it is important, to list the -V x settings together with averaged target bitrates & ranges (and together with equalling preset xy), which explains the character of VBR mode very good without much text.

As producing a high quality mp3 is not only about using the good preset, it is also about ripping with eac following one of the recognized tutorials, and some other helpful audio links, so that newbies find a good start to get even more knowledge and maybe find interest to participate at HA community by abx tests etc.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beto on 2005-09-17 18:25:54
Are we going to focus on the presets or in the V switch to demonstrate quality? IMO this is confusing to newbies. IMO a name (preset whatever) brings more meaning than a number (V whatever)... 
For sure I believe this should be standardized someway for the sake of simplicity...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: moozooh on 2005-09-17 19:29:19
I understand your intentions user, but something is bugging me as well.
Actually, all you must read to start using LAME well is quite a little piece of text. But the amount of text in the recommended settings is just enormous! I guess, most of the casual users won't even bother themselves to scan through it for the required piece of information.
That's why I suggested leave, well, the actual settings (especially presets) and move all the optional information to a more appropriate place (and HA Knowledgebase is more than appropriate place for that purpose).
The truth is, the recommended settings themselves is about 1/6 of the entire post, which is quite amusing to me.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Shade[ST] on 2005-09-17 19:55:27
Mo0zOoH : preset fast medium is higher quality than preset standard?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-17 20:01:55
Quote
,Sep 17 2005, 07:55 PM]Mo0zOoH : preset fast medium is higher quality than preset standard?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327596"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


no problem, a typo,
whilst inserting that passage of text, I corrected it, the true list of settings is without that mistake.

What is of higher priority would be an edit of the other 2 sticky posts,
* recommended lame compiles,
* and about lame versions and alphas, that could be updated with recommendation to use 3.97b1 and only for testing alphas or 3.90.3


beto:
Are we going to focus on the presets or in the V switch to demonstrate quality? IMO this is confusing to newbies. IMO a name (preset whatever) brings more meaning than a number (V whatever)... 
For sure I believe this should be standardized someway for the sake of simplicity...

well, we focus meanwhile on the -V switches, which are the shortest and also most simple abbreviation for the presets !
Concentrating on -V x will be simpler as it is shorter and faster to write.
I have followed the discussions here, and noticed, that of course people write -V2  (--vbr-new) these days, instaed of the long --(alt)preset (fast) standard, though it means the same for the new lame versions.
Another reason is very simple, there are no special names for most of the presets, like -V3, -V6 and so forth.
Next reason: Analogue to the quality scales of MPC and Ogg, Lame-Mp3 has now the -V x system.
But for a smooth transition, you will notice, that I used the layout first used by Frank Bicking for the "German HA audio-hq.de", which offers both, the -V x setting, then if existing, the name of the "preset xy", then the target bitrates.
What's difficult to understand in that table ?




Regarding current List of "settings" (<-- I explained above, why the name of the topic is restricted, though the content should cover all important stuff about MP3),
I am quite satisfied with the structure, maybe somebody goes through the links section, and helps finding replacement links, where i asked for help.
Some links to certain proggies could maybe wiped out, as other links are there, which do already better.
But the history has shown, that in past people requested, that I add this and those links to their preferred programs.
So the list of links went bigger.
If you could suggest concrete links, which could be erased or replaced by better ones, tell me, please.

The structure of the post is fine though, it starts after some short introduction about quality vbr > abr > cbr directly with the settings highest quality 1st, then going down.
This principle is followed,
then the abr, then the cbr settings are explained.

Then there is a break with Remarks section following.
There is the mysterium of the --vbr-new switch explained, very important, of course.
Then I added Mo0zOoH's explanations about some higher quality settings to the remarks, as those explanations do not cover all today's quality settings of lame, it is only possible, to have that text as remark, as remarks it is good text explaining when most people apply this or that setting for certain aims. If the remarks seem to long, then these remarks could be shortened out, as the topic would work without also, but I think, too, it is better, people have something to read.
Because there is not too much to read.
If you see this topic as entrance for newbies to the world of mp3 in best quality and as entrance to HA, then it is good to mention some stuff in that post, not only a short list of settings.

Then as next chapter there is the case guide for EAC setup.
very necessary as quickstart to EAC.

Then the links section.

Because you cannot teach people EAC inside of this little post, but you can make them hungry by pointing them to EAC (see the Case EAC-mp3 setup guide inside the post), and then offer the links to the good EAC tutorials to the hungry people.
As HA is about quality, analyzing, audio on a scientific basis, approach (ABX, TOS 8), it is also good, to point people to replaygain/mp3gain (that is even important  from a practical point of view), to Encspot, Mr. Quedstionman (could encspot link be erased, is it redundant these days ?)
and so forth.


All in all, the "list of settings" post was not made only by me, you see exactly in the credits, who contributed, too, you will find Dibrom himself, who wrote there, other people, who developed the layout.
All in all, these people were lucky with the list of settings, remarks, eac guide, & links, as this post was even a good bookmark list for more experienced people.
Of course, somebody needs to decide and weigh out, which is too few or too much information. Imo, the list is now better than ever, compare to 1 month ago, the list is better than ever, because lame is better than ever, so here again my personal thank you to the MP3 & Lame developers in past, present & future !
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beto on 2005-09-17 21:27:39
Quote
well, we focus meanwhile on the -V switches, which are the shortest and also most simple abbreviation for the presets !
Concentrating on -V x will be simpler as it is shorter and faster to write.
I have followed the discussions here, and noticed, that of course people write -V2 (--vbr-new) these days, instaed of the long --(alt)preset (fast) standard, though it means the same for the new lame versions.
Another reason is very simple, there are no special names for most of the presets, like -V3, -V6 and so forth.
Next reason: Analogue to the quality scales of MPC and Ogg, Lame-Mp3 has now the -V x system.
But for a smooth transition, you will notice, that I used the layout first used by Frank Bicking for the "German HA audio-hq.de", which offers both, the -V x setting, then if existing, the name of the "preset xy", then the target bitrates.
What's difficult to understand in that table ?


The difficulty is that there are 2 "systems" (preset and V switch) to deal with the same thing: quality. My suggestion is to use either one.
Vorbis and MPC, for instance, have just one "system".
Avoid complexity is a good thing IMO.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: onthejazz on 2005-09-17 22:43:30
Quote
i think we should start simple, and then continue adding more info for the ones needing it ... if the post is too long, people don't care ... maybe a "quick explanation as first post", and a "long explanation" as the following one.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327331"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


This is still the best idea anyone has had.  You can't look at it as it makes sense to an experienced user. You have to look at it as what is too much information to discourage a newbie from understanding & taking the time to learn it.  First post, simple explanation. Second post goes into more detailed information.  One big post is too much for someone just learning this to want to bother with.  And the main focus should be to educate people who don't know or understand...yet.  JMHO.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: benc on 2005-09-18 01:31:32
Hope this doesn't seem to cheeky for a lurker to post this, but here is my suggestion for how a recommend settings thread could be done. I'm not saying that this should be the exact wording (or that the wording is even correct!) and some colour could probably improve readability.

Stuff about --vbr-new vs. --vbr-old, and and a table showing what the --preset switches are equivalent to, could go in a post below (maybe as a mini FAQ) to keep the main info as tidy as possible.

***************************

<very short introduction goes here>

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']VBR (Variable Bitrate)[/span]

VBR mode provides constant quality at the expense of bitrate prediction. This is the recommend way to use LAME when quality is most important factor.

--V n --vbr-new (where n is a number between 0-9)

Example: -V 2 --vbr-new

0 is the highest quality and 9 is the lowest. Below is a table showing the approximate bitrate range you can expect with each quality setting:

Code: [Select]
Switch            Target bitrate range (kbps)

-V 0 --vbr-new    245…285
-V 1 --vbr-new    220…260
-V 2 --vbr-new    170…210
-V 3 --vbr-new    155…195
-V 4 --vbr-new    145…185
-V 5 --vbr-new    110…150
-V 6 --vbr-new    95…135
-V 7 --vbr-new    80…120
-V 8 --vbr-new    65…105
-V 9 --vbr-new    45…85


-V 2 --vbr-new will provide transparent quality for most people. It is a good compromise between file size and sound quality, and is recommended as a starting point for new users.


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']ABR (Average Bitrate)[/span]

ABR mode is a type of VBR mode where you can specify the target bitrate. Files created with the normal VBR mode will be of a higher quality than those created with the ABR mode at the same bitrate. Use ABR mode when bitrate is more important than quality.

--abr n (where n is any number between 8-320)

Example: --abr 173


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']CBR (Constant Bitrate)[/span]

CBR mode uses the same bitrate throughout the file and is the mode that most other MP3 encoders use. It will provide lower quality than ABR mode for a given bitrate, but it can be useful for streaming and when VBR/ABR may cause compatibility problems.

-b n (where n is 8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 64 , 80 , 96 , 112 , 128 , 160 , 192 , 256 or 320)

Example: -b 128


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Best possible quality[/span]

If you want LAME to encode using the best quality possible use the following switch:

-b 320

This will produce a 320kbps CBR file, and it is the only time when CBR mode is recommended instead of VBR mode for quality.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-18 09:53:52
Note: average bitrate range of VBR levels are overlapping, so the V1 range should overlap with the V2 range.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DARcode on 2005-09-18 11:42:50
Quote
Not sure if it's been mentioned or already linked to (didn't see it), but this (http://home-12.tiscali-business.nl/~tpm54044/) EAC guide and info is very useful.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327368"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm w/ jaybee, as far as EAC only goes I always recommend that one.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-23 16:10:01
*bitrate ranges:

V1 is now probably in the 200-250kbps range (not 220…260), and V0 in the 230-260kbps range (not 245…285)

*recommended vbr settings table:
I am not sure if there is a need to have lines with Vx and with Vx --vbr-new, as the bitrate ranges are identical.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-23 17:45:54
Quote
*recommended vbr settings table:
I am not sure if there is a need to have lines with Vx and with Vx --vbr-new, as the bitrate ranges are identical.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329070"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Thanks for the bitrate ranges.

The 2 lines, each with -V x & -V x --vbr-new, were written there to give clearly both alternatives, (until 1 of the vbr modes is proven to be (clearly?) superior than the other).
Is the question, if --vbr-new is superior to default vbr mode, decided ?
(at least for one or more -Vx settings)
In such cases, we remove the inferior commandline.

Because, iirc, now we consider --vbr-new to be (slightly?) better, should I edit the settings table, and write each setting with vbr-new switch above the standard -V setting ?
(because we wrote at top of table, that table goes from highest quality settings to lower quality settings)
Eg.
-V x --vbr-new
-V x
instead of current layout:
-V x
-V x --vbr-new

edit-addon:
Due to the general impression to prefer --vbr-ne qualitywise, I have already carried my above idea, to write --vbr-new presets over the standard -V settings.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: MJT on 2005-09-23 22:44:57
The first link (http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm) on the post goes to a page for 3.98 alpha 2, although the actual download page (http://www.free-codecs.com/Lame_Encoder_download.htm) has a link to 3.97b1. Perhaps it's better to link to rarewares as a default and free-codecs as the alternative?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-24 09:25:31
Why not just mentionning the -V values without --vbr-new in the table, and mentionning that for each -V setting you can choose between --vbr-old and --vbr-new, vbr-old beeing the default setting but vbr-new beeing of slightly higher quality and faster.

I think that you also need to drop a line indicating that vbr-new is faster because of the use of a different algorithm than vbr-old, otherwise many people seem to be suspicious about vbr-new, as in their mind faster == lower quality.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: moozooh on 2005-09-24 19:27:06
Quote
otherwise many people seem to be suspicious about vbr-new, as in their mind faster == lower quality.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329240"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, if you make it the default VBR setting, they won't even notice. I don't see a single countercause. :|
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Cosmo on 2005-09-24 20:49:38
If the new vbr algorithm is now in fact faster and equal or higher quality, it seems like a mistake not to make it the default just because of potential unfounded suspicions. Isn't it most appropriate and logical to send/receive the message that the default settings are the best ones? I see it as punishing the people who use good judgement and trust the default presets, and rewarding the people who would second-guess (think they know better than) the developers.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: moozooh on 2005-09-24 23:44:34
Not to mention the fact that the speed and quality increase from ---vbr-new may help to attract new audience…

Oh wait.
It's not a commercial project.

Nevermind then. :B
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: ExUser on 2005-09-25 00:27:24
So does --vbr-new provide noticably worse quality than the default VBR mode? I remember seeing some listening tests that implied that there are cases in which --vbr-new outperforms the default. I might be mistaken, however.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: VCSkier on 2005-09-25 06:05:55
as it has been stated before, --vbr-new has shown (particularly by guruboolez, but also by others) to generally have better quality, and generally has been accepted as the higher quality vbr mode.  as with many things of this nature, some samples have been found where --vbr-new has some more noticable artifacts than the default, but most of the time, based on the tests of the members here, --vbr-new performs better.

edit: typo
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-25 10:13:57
*vbr-new seems to be better overall than vbr-old on the 0-5 range, but at lower quality settings, we are into the unknown world.

*vbr-new will NOT be defaulted in 3.97
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Madrigal on 2005-09-25 11:16:42
Quote
*vbr-new will NOT be defaulted in 3.97
Thank you for this clear statement. Hopefully the rest of us can stop pushing for it, and put this one to bed for now.

Anybody who is sufficiently interested in the differences between -old and -new will surely discover how to implement them, and there is no need to default -new. Especially since (as Gabriel has pointed out) many potential implementations of -new are in virgin, relatively untested territory.

Regards,
Madrigal
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Jojo on 2005-09-25 21:58:13
Quote
*vbr-new seems to be better overall than vbr-old on the 0-5 range, but at lower quality settings, we are into the unknown world.

*vbr-new will NOT be defaulted in 3.97
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329424"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

so why not use it just for --preset standard etc. then?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: teleguise on 2005-09-26 00:50:48
That's why I had asked for a little insight on what was going to which 'dev0' pasted
some info from 'Robert' on.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....topic=37276&hl= (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=37276&hl=)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: zipr on 2005-09-27 00:19:15
Am I the only one who is having problems with the recommended settings for EAC w/regard to the genre tag?

I'm using this

-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

Set up as suggested, and LAME never includes the genre tag.  Any ideas?  I'm using the 3.97 beta.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kockroach on 2005-09-27 02:12:27
Genre is obtained using the following

--tg "%m"

You also need to make sure that the genre is one that is in the drop down list in EAC.  Otherwise it will not work.

Edit:  Here's my string:

--alt-preset standard --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" %s %d

I'm still using 3.90.3, so I haven't switched to the "V" switch yet.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 07:33:01
Some thoughts:Edit: Removed immature comments.

While I appretiate your effort, user, it doesn't grant you the right to do as you wish.
Modifying the current recommended settings thread (which has been restored by now) without asking the moderation or considering the process of this thread is neither acceptable nor productive.
This thread was ment as a collaborative effort to define the shape of the new recommended settings (or whatever its new name is going to be) thread, while the old one stays in place as long as it has to (originally I planned switching to the new one once 3.97-final is released). Replacing the old one with a piece of smattering (you obviously didn't follow LAME development very closely) while changes are still being discussed here is just another one of your egotistic actions, which don't serve the community at all.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 09:54:36
Quote
While I appretiate your effort, user, it doesn't grant you the right to do as you wish.
Modifying the current recommended settings thread (which has been restored by now) without asking the moderation or considering the process of this thread is neither acceptable nor productive.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=329857")


Explain me how keeping the same four year old recommandation could be considered as "productive" ?
Quote
you obviously didn't follow LAME development very closely

Did you? Where are your tests results? You [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=30424&view=findpost&p=264415] announced[/url] some of them in january, but I still can't find any of them.

Quote
while changes are still being discussed here is just another one of your egotistic actions, which don't serve the community at all.

The egoistic action comes from HA.org moderation and administration. Not from user. People are not using 3.90.3 anymore. Not even on HA.org, which is -or rather was- the sanctuary of 3.90.3. It has been proved to be outdated, slow, and producing lower quality. There's no reason to keep 3.90.3 (aka 3.90.2 --alt-preset standard -Z) which was never fully tested. People like you are not contributing anymore to making LAME better. Not even ONE single ABX test have been posted by moderation team. LAME developers has checked the code in order to release a beta safe to use. Most people are using this version. Please: forgot this old wreck. It doesn't serve the community for a long time. 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 10:31:54
Thanks guruboolez,

I just give fact:

I wa sonly able to edit my sticky post with the new content,
because Citay allowed me, because as normal member, i wasn't able to edit the closed topic,
Citay made it unclosed, so that I could work again.

Is Citay a moderator, HA administration, or not ?
Was my work helpful, the new content better than the old , or not ?
Have I built in the ideas, suggestions, which were written inside this work-topic, even by the Lame-developer Gabriel, or not ?


[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']edit-addon:

* The collection of software/links should be cleaned up/sorted out. Much of it isn't maintained anymore.
This is the only critics, which is in my horizon, which can be targeted to me.
of course, others have requested an update of links section also,
and guess, what ?!
I did that! it was long in my ToDo list. Did that also for the sticky MPC topic.
Can dev0 restore the sticky post ?
And by the way, people, who want better uptodate link list, could simply help me, and post here or elsewhere, or PM or email, an own, updated link-list.
has anybody done that ?
all the time before ?
yes, some people, you find them in this topic, helped with some links.
Just with moaning, "link list should be better", there is not much progress, you need somebody with time and the will to do it. Simply. period.[/span]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 11:02:33
Quote
Genre is obtained using the following

--tg "%m"

You also need to make sure that the genre is one that is in the drop down list in EAC.  Otherwise it will not work.

One of the benefits of the newer LAMEs over 3.90.3 is the inclusion of the --ignore-tag-errors switch.  When included, if an unrecognised genre is passed to LAME the genre "Other" is used, instead of execution stopping.

Personally I think this is really useful.  If --tg is to be included in a recommended command line I think mention needs to be made of the genre tagging in LAME, and that passing incorrect genres may end in termination unless --ignore-tag-errors is included.

I guess it's not suitable for everyone, as it could be construed as as inaccurate tagging - but I think it's useful to allow encoding, with the option to sort the genre tag later using an alternative tagger.  LAME will warn you that the genre was unrecognised and that "Other" has been used in its place.

Edit: Suggested text:

[span style='font-size:12pt;line-height:100%']You can specify a genre for the file by using the --tg switch, e.g.: --tg "Rock".  LAME recognises 148 genres, which may be specified using the genre name or associated number.

To view an alphabetical list of the genres that LAME recognises use:

LAME.EXE --genre-list

If you pass LAME a genre name or number that is does not recognise execution will halt before any encoding takes place.  If you would like to set a genre that LAME does not recognise, or you simply want to ensure that an incorrect genre will not halt your encoding process, you may use the --ignore-tag-errors switch.  With this switch in your command line LAME will report that the genre is invalid, and that it will use the genre "Other" in its place, but encoding will still take place.  You may then use an alternative ID3 tagging application to amend the genre to something more relevant.
[/span]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 11:10:53
I wasn't aware your action was coordinated with CiTay, so there's a clear need for an excuse from my side.

I assumed you changed the recommended settings thread without asking a moderator, but even if that was the case my reaction would still be immature and impolite. There wasn't a lack of coordination between the moderation and user, but between the moderation and myself. I'm really sorry for attacking you on the base of pure speculation and anger.
There might be consequences regarding my involvment in HA.org, which has been sparse to nonexisting recently anyways, but I need to chill and get my head clear before making any decisions.


I still believe that the old recommended settings thread should be kept as long as it has to, meaning it should be kept as long as there's no semi-complete version of the new one available. I didn't consider user's (or anyone else's) ideas as finished when they were presented in this thread.

Gurboolez, I completely understand your point and, even if you won't believe me, I stronly agree with you when saying that there's no point in beating the dead horse 3.90.3 anymore. However I think the switch should be well prepared and carefully conducted, which is exactly why I started this thread:
To not let a single person define what the next four years are going to look like, but let discourse develop it.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 11:23:44
Hej, dev0,
I accept your apologies, a misunderstanding, chill out, take some good music.

So, I hope, you can restore the post, with last content.
because, the sticky post was always work-in -progress, and you don't need to worry, that it looks then 4 years again unchanged, if the topic is not closed again.
Inside this topic was the last version of the 3.90.3 list, you "restored" by your accident, and for various reasons, directly at the top of the new 3.97 list, this old content was linked !!! 
it reveals more and more, that you haven't read the new topic, you would have got the old 3.90.3 content so easy from the new 3.97 content, both were available.
If i read your thoughts, you have wide overlaps with me regarding content, starting with the common idea, that 3.97 and -V system should start over & that there should be  a link to the old 3.90.3 topic, all was there, not so semi-complete .
The new topic was already well thought through, consider all the ideas written inside here.
For this reason, I edited & worked a lot, and so, I don't have the latest copy of the content, the start of the new topic is inside this topic also, and then it was developed step by step.
I can only hope, that you have it, as I don#t know, if I take the time again, to work on it.



Well, there is the wiki eg. where the content of the topic should be presented also, feel free, to use any layout you want, i cannot maintain everything, I concentrated on the forum.
And as it is matter of fact, I am always open for better presentations of layout, I was bad  at school at making arts myself, but I am an analyst in science, with a bridge to the broad public, interestingly, my profession is analogue to my role of my hobby music and helping other people to use best thingies.
And so, I have mostly a very good understanding, what looks better, be it painting arts, music, or layouts of presenting knowhow to people.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 12:02:44
This is basically a collection/remix of the ideas I liked best so far. Links and EAC tutorial are intentionally missing. I really like the clear and concise explanations benc wrote.

Updated 2005-03-12

These settings require Lame 3.95 or later.  Lame 3.97 found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here (http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html) [fixme] to download).

Note:  At a given bitrate range, the quality scale usually works to where VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (CBR < ABR < VBR in terms of quality).  The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps.

Discussion has been moved here. (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=203&st=0#entry1596)


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']The Quick Start:[/span]
[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']If you are just getting started with encoding MP3s and are overwhelmed by the amount of settings, chances are -V 2 --vbr-new is the right setting for you. This setting is considered transparent (not discernable from the original) on the majority of samples to the majority of listeners. Of course there are situations where other settings might be more appropiate (portable use or streaming), read about the alternatives below.[/span]


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']VBR (Variable Bitrate)[/span]

The VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs. There is no "correct" quality level to use, and the following is only a suggestion to help you get started:

For portables devices with limited storage capacity try V5, V6 or V7.
For normal high quality usages try V3 or V4.
For transparency try V2 or better.

--V n (where n is a number between 0-9)

Example: -V 2

0 is the highest quality and 9 is the lowest. Below is a table showing the approximate bitrate range you can expect with each quality setting:

Code: [Select]
Switch  Bitrate range kbps

-V 0    230…260
-V 1    200…250
-V 2    170…210
-V 3    155…195
-V 4    145…185
-V 5    110…150
-V 6    95…135
-V 7    80…120
-V 8    65…105
-V 9    45…85


-V 2 --vbr-new will provide transparent quality for most people. It is a good compromise between file size and sound quality, and is recommended as a starting point for new users.

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']Remarks:[/span]

About the new VBR mode (also referenced as --vbr-new)
The --vbr-new switch enables the new VBR mode. Lame will encode much faster compared to old/default vbr mode. Current knowledge qualitywise comparing default vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artifact, that shows up in --vbr-new compared to default. Though the general impression is, that --vbr-new should be recommended over vbr-default.
The presets from -V0 to -V3 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. (That means, most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in a double blindtest)

[span style='font-size:9pt;line-height:100%']A little bit of history: The presets (--alt-preset xxx) for the 3.90.X branch of LAME were designed by many of the original members of this site and were exhaustively tested to make sure that they utilized the best possible settings for quality. Subsequent versions of LAME broke compatibility with these presets to allow for many other improvements (faster, bug issues, etc), thus making a temporary regression in quality. A new, more flexible preset system was introduced (the -V switches). LAME 3.96.1 seemed as though it might be about the same quality as 3.90.3 in some of the tests done after it was released. During the development of 3.97 members of this site (especially Guruboolez) conducted many tests to ensure that 3.97 outclasses 3.90.3 and 3.96.1 in quality.
Though there will be nothing wrong if you select either --alt-preset xy, preset xy or corresponding switch xy, you will always get the same  (e.g: --alt-preset cbr 320 = --alt-preset insane = --preset insane = -b 320 = --preset 320 = --preset cbr 320).[/span]

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']ABR (Average Bitrate)[/span]

ABR mode is a type of VBR mode where you can specify the target bitrate. Files created with the normal VBR mode will be of a higher quality than those created with the ABR mode at the same bitrate. Use ABR mode when bitrate predictability is more important than quality.

--abr n (where n is any number between 8-320)

Example: --abr 173


[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']CBR (Constant Bitrate)[/span]

CBR mode uses the same bitrate throughout the file and is the mode that most other MP3 encoders use. It will provide lower quality than ABR mode for a given bitrate, but it can be useful for streaming and when VBR/ABR may cause compatibility problems.

-b n (where n is 8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 64 , 80 , 96 , 112 , 128 , 160 , 192 , 256 or 320)

Example: -b 128

[span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%']Best possible quality[/span]

If you want LAME to encode using the best quality possible use the following switch:

-b 320

This will produce a 320kbps CBR file, and it is the only time when CBR mode is recommended instead of VBR mode for quality.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 12:16:42
Quote
--V n (where n is a number between 0-9)

Example: -V 2 --vbr-new

Eh? Where'd the -vbr-new suddenly appear from?

This passage, the first introduction to the -V settings, is supposed to describe what the -V settings do, and suddenly we have a --vbr-new switch in there, with no introduction.

Do I have to use --vbr-new whenever I specify -V?

I'll accept it in the "Quickstart" if that is what HA are recommending, and I guess I'll accept it below the table - but I don't think it should be in the passage above, when the passage is describing the -V switch.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 12:19:36
Quote
Quote
--V n (where n is a number between 0-9)

Example: -V 2 --vbr-new

Eh? Where'd the -vbr-new suddenly appear from?

This passage, the first introduction to the -V settings, is supposed to describe what the -V settings do, and suddenly we have a --vbr-new switch in there, with no introduction.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329894"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I completely agree. Fixed.
Actually I just forget deleting it in the example, since I did delete it in the commandline.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 12:22:08
well, indeed,

dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.
(referring to what synthetic soul said.)

He Pmed me, he cannot restore my/our work of the last week(s), hours I invested, he made no backup.
He could simply delete it, but not building up.

I can only hope, that he finds somewhere a copy of latest content/backup, then we are lucky.
The attempt of now trying to make now own work, is quite hopeless, doesn#t *repair the damage done.
*citing a song, which is known, and doesn#t contain 4-letter words in the citing


I will make a last attempt to repair a smuch a spossible, I have a backup of the german version of the sticky post dated from 2 days later, so many updates are contained, though it is silly work to restore work, which was already done, for everybody, me, dev0, all the guys who wrote their ideas here, which were all represented in the sticky topic by me, as much as it is possible to represent a lot of opinions.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 12:24:20
Quote
dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329896"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I'd like to hear other's oppinions about that.
Credit for my suggestions goes mostly to benc and you though.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 12:30:19
Thanks.

Apart from that, I like the format.

However, am I being thick?  That post explains the different encoding tecniques (VBR/CBR/ABR) of LAME, and has a quickstart stating that -V2 --vbr-new is recommended - but there is no other mention of recommendations.

The current text is, on the whole, an explanation of LAME usage.

Do you/we intend to add more recommendations, or is the thinking that users can make their own conclusions given this information?

Will the new thread contain the EAC recommended command lines (how about foobar) and links to software?

I guess I'm just jumping the gun a bit here. 

Edit: NB: written before user's post.

I still like the format - it's clean and easy to follow.  I just wonder whether we will be sticking our neck out on "recommendations" more.

Edit 2: Sorry missed this:

Quote
Links and EAC tutorial are intentionally missing.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 12:37:15
Quote
However, am I being thick?  That post explains the different encoding tecniques (VBR/CBR/ABR) of LAME, and has a quickstart stating that -V2 --vbr-new is recommended - but there is no other mention of recommendations.

The current text is, on the whole, an explanation of LAME usage.

I understand your concern and I'm thinking about ways to make recommendations, but in the end it's always hard to make a clear recommendation. If you look at the (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=15049) other (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=1927) recommendation threads, you'll see a similiar emphasis there.
As the usage of commandline encoders gets simpler (I consider the -V settings a huge improvment over the old --preset), the need for such threads gets smaller.
As user explained the "recommended settings" thread was started at a time when getting the best quality out of LAME was quite a complex task.

Quote
Do you/we intend to add more recommendations, or is the thinking that users can make their own conclusions given this information?

If anybody has any good ideas about how to do this, of course.

Quote
Will the new thread contain the EAC recommended command lines (how about foobar) and links to software?[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329899"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Of course. The EAC part is IMHO one of the most important parts. I just left it out, because everyone seems to be fine with taking over case's wording.
foobar2000 0.9 will feature the recommended settings by default.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-27 12:45:36
Here is the previous one, from Google cache

Quote
Major update with Lame 3.97:




Updated 2005-09-16






These settings require Lame 3.97 or later. Lame 3.97beta1 (beta=b) found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here or Rarewares to download).
Do not use alpha (a) versions ! Those are for testing purposes, if you want.

Note: At a given bitrate range, the quality scale is following: VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (VBR > ABR > CBR in terms of quality). The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).
VBR: variable bitrate mode, the goal is to keep a constant quality and saving bits where possible without lowering the quality.
ABR: average bitrate mode varies bits around a specified target bitrate
CBR: constant bitrate mode is not efficient regarding distributing bitrate to more complex music parts and saving bits where it would be possible without lowering the quality of those music parts.
Note: all modes and settings mentioned in this topic belong to the specifications of the MP3 standard, and the resulting MP3s should be played by every standard-conform MP3-Decoder. If this shouldn't be the case, blame the manufacturer or developer of your MP3-Decoder/device. Neither the hydrogenaudio.org community, HA staff, nor the authors of this post take any responsibility for anything.

Discussion has been moved here.






-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------

The settings, presets are listed beginning with highest possible quality stepping down to lower qualities:

CODE


Switch            equals preset        target kbit/s  Bitrate range kbit/s

-b 320          = --preset insane        320 CBR    320
-V 0            = --preset extreme       240      245…285
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240      245…285
-V 1                                     210      220…260
-V 1 --vbr-new                           210      220…260
-V 2            = --preset standard      190      170…210
-V 2 --vbr-new  = --preset fast standard 190      170…210
-V 3                                     175      155…195
-V 3 --vbr-new                           175      155…195
-V 4            = --preset medium        165      145…185
-V 4 --vbr-new  = --preset fast medium   165      145…185
-V 5                                     130      110…150
-V 5 --vbr-new                           130      110…150
-V 6                                     115       95…135
-V 6 --vbr-new                           115       95…135
-V 7                                     100       80…120
-V 7 --vbr-new                           100       80…120
-V 8                                      85       65…105
-V 8 - vbr-new                            85       65…105
-V 9                                      65       45…85
-V 9 - vbr-new                            65       45…85




If the target is eg. streaming , where you need MP3 in ABR or even CBR mode, there are still the ABR and CBR modes.
You can specify your desired target bitrate:

ABR = Average Bitrate mode:

--abr xxx = --preset xxx

xxx (desired averaged bitrate in kbit/s) can be any value between 8 - 320 , like eg. 9, 17, 80, 128, 133, 200 etc.

Only for 128k ABR:
There was developed an alternative to the --abr 128 preset:
ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html):
--abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93
Different people have different tastes regarding artefacts and their behaviour of annoyance, so try out --abr 128 vs. --abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93


CBR = Constant Bitrate mode:

-b xxx = --preset cbr xxx

xxx (desired bitrate in kbit/s) can be only: 8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 64 , 80 , 96 , 112 , 128 , 160 , 192 , 256 or 320








Remarks:
the --vbr-new switch enables the new VBR mode. Lame will encode much faster compared to old/default vbr mode. Current knowledge qualitywise comparing vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artefact, which is worse in --vbr-new compared to default. Though the general impression is, that --vbr-new should be recommended over vbr-default.
The presets -V 0 , -V 1 , -V 2 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. (transparent = most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in an ABX blindtest)
For high quality on portable MP3 players, you may use -V 4 (--vbr-new)= --preset (fast) medium (around 165 kbit/s).
-V 5 --vbr-new is a very good replacement for 128 kbit/s encodings.

The revolutionary --alt-preset system introduced in lame 3.90, is replaced nowadays by the preset system, which is already substituted by the above explained settings system.
You don't need to worry, if you select nowadays in lame 3.97 either --alt-preset xy , preset xy or corresponding switch xy, you will always get the same.
E.G.: --alt-preset cbr 320 is the exact same thing as --alt-preset insane etc.:
--alt-preset insane = --preset insane = -b 320 = --preset 320 = --preset cbr 320








-------------------------------------------------
Setting up EAC for lame.exe with tagging
-------------------------------------------------
Based on Case's tutorial

Select compression options from EAC menu.
Open 'External Compression' tab.

1. Check 'Use external program for compression'
2. Change 'Parameter passing scheme' to 'User Defined Encoder'
3. Set file extension to .mp3
4. Click 'Browse' and locate 'lame.exe'
5. Change 'Additional command line options' to one of the following commandlines
6. Check 'Delete WAV after compression'
7. Uncheck 'Add ID3 tag'

QUOTE
ID3v1:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v1-only --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v1 and ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

APEv2: (requires wapet.exe)
%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" lame.exe -V 2 --vbr-new %s %d

(You can change -V 2 --vbr-new to any setting/preset you'd like to use)

These commandlines are generally recommended over EAC's own tagging routines and its LAME encoder parameter passing preset, which is known to cause problems.
The bitrate setting serves a cosmetic purpose and is used for the size display in EAC's main window.


-------------------------------------------------
Useful links
-------------------------------------------------

(Latest LAME compiles)
Dmitry's compiles
Dibrom's compiles
Rarewares.org MP3 section

(MP3 Information sites)
Hydrogen Audio
Decoder test by David Robinson

(MP3 Forums)
Hydrogenaudio MP3 forum



(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site
Tutorial for EAC
EAC forum


(LAME Frontends)
RazorLame

EasyLAME (german)

HeadAC3he by Dark Avenger : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2
BeSweet by DSPGuru : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 with batch-possibility


(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend
Helium2
Renatager
MPTagger
More tagging information & programs
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection



(MP3 Gain) - lossless gain change / "normalizing"!
Official site
Basic Guide to avoid clipping


(How to)
Burn an MP3 CD
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file : Try Monkeys Audio http://www.monkeysaudio.com/ (http://www.monkeysaudio.com/), or maybe better: foobar 2000, use the CLI encoder: http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html (http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html)
MPC -> MP3 by MPCxchange


(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot
ff123's artefact training
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening
Training of musically listening good-ear.com
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com
MP3Utility

QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files


-------------------------------------------------
Credits
-------------------------------------------------

A big thanks to all LAME developers for making one kickass MP3 codec.

People who took part in suggesting the different settings:
Dibrom, r3mix, ff123, Hans Heijden, kjempen, Benjamin Lebsanft, GeSomeone, Wombat & GuruBoolez for his immense testing.

Creation of the alt preset system and related special code level quality enhancements:
Dibrom, with technical assistance from Robert Hegemann and Naoki Shibata and extensive tuning help and quality verification via listening tests from JohnV and also initial help (--dm-preset era) from Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, and others. Test clips, bitrate information, and further listening tests provided by TheBashar, zbutsam, Pio2001, BadDuDeX, r3mix, h, TarX, Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, Filburt, Volcano, Garf, MrDrew, TrNSZ, nyaochi, Amadeus93, in no particular order, and many, many others I (Dibrom) probably forgot to mention.. (msg me to be added)

Idea (also exposing the need for a unified preset system), Original post and list of original settings collected by: user
Layout and additional work by: dev0, CiTay, SNYder, Dibrom


And finally...

Thank you ALL in the community for making it what it is, providing interest and discussion and helping to work towards the most concise, well tuned, and most thought out MP3 quality "paradigm" seen yet! biggrin.gif -- Dibrom
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 12:49:47
The only thing I can think of with regard to recommendations is to additionally recommend a VBR alternative to CBR 128 (presumably -V5 --vbr-new).

I totally agree that recommendations are difficult.  I know there is even contention with regard to -V2, as many (non-HA/non-audiophile) users don't really need this level.  I'm not suggesting that -V2 is changed - but simply highlighting that a recommendation is always going to be contentious, as we don't all have the same level of hearing.  Mine's not brilliant.

I have just seen your edit and agree that the diversity of the -V switches negates the need so much for recommendations.

I wonder whether the correlation between -V and --(alt-)preset would be useful in the table?  I've just seen Gabriel's post of the previous content and that table may be useful to help people move from --(alt-)preset to -V.

I noticed late that you had already stated that the EAC guide and links have been left out.

Edit: With regard to the "accusation" of lacking content - I think too much content is just going to be way too confusing for a new user - which this post/thread is supposed to be aimed at!  I even think some info - e.g.: the background behind the presets - could be links to other documents, e.g:

If you are interested in reading about the background behind the LAME presets please take a look at this page (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk/).

Do new users really care about the background?  Spods like me do, but some guy who just wants to rip his "Shitting Grannies" CD for his mate on the 'net couldn't give two hoots.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kritip on 2005-09-27 12:51:27
Ah, i had the same idea of google cache but couldn't find it. Mind posting the steps you used to locate it??

Cheers,

Kristian
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 12:53:50
Quote
I wonder whether the correlation between -V and --(alt-)preset would be useful in the table?  I've just seen Gabriel's post of the previous content and that table may be useful to help people move from --(alt-)preset to -V.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=329904")

I think putting the correlating old preset into the table would cause confusion rather than assisting the transition.
I think a link to [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=18091]this thread[/url] would suffice for those who want to know.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 12:53:58
I'm still bothered by the quick start recommendation. Why V2 and not V3? Or V1?
Originally, recommending --preset standard was easy to understand: there were no other preset (apart --r3mix). Standard was the only choice for transparent/efficient encodings.

But now, situation is different. We have V3, V4 and also V1.
V3 or even V4 may be as transparent as V2 for several people. Using them will help them to save bitrate and to use more efficiently the free space of their portable player.
On the other side, V1 might be a better choice for some critical listeners. In my case, V2 is rarelly transparent (on ABX conditions). V1 is simply better (I'd say "more transparent" if it makes sense).

In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 12:57:55
--my mistake--
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 12:57:58
Quote
In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".

I don't understand.

Are you suggesting that we don't recommend any value, that we change from -V2 to -VX, or that we have multiple recommendations?

I agreed with most of your response, but I was assuming your conclusion would be that we don't make any recommendations.

Edit:
Quote
--my mistake--

I just thought you were in total agreement with yourself
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 13:00:50
Quote
Quote
In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".

I don't understand.

Are you suggesting that we don't recommend any value, that we change from -V2 to -VX, or that we have multiple recommendations?

I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 13:03:47
google cashe was a good idea, but unfortunately, as Gabriel found, it shows also the very old content from 2005-09-16, I found in googles cashe 2005-09-17, progress !
I have 2005-09-18 in german, from which I can retranslate again and use layout for restore.
Though that won't be a sperfect, as the stickly post was made during the weekend, dunno, when i made last edit, Sunday or Monday, yesterday.

And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place., in this topic, posts above.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-27 13:03:55
Quote
Ah, i had the same idea of google cache but couldn't find it. Mind posting the steps you used to locate it??

http://www.google.com/search?q=%5BRFC%5D+L...=utf-8&oe=utf-8 (http://www.google.com/search?q=%5BRFC%5D+List+of+recommended+LAME+settings&sourceid=mozilla&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 13:04:10
Quote
I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.

OK, thank you.

It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.

Tricky.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: sTisTi on 2005-09-27 13:05:20
Quote
Quote
dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329896"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I'd like to hear other's oppinions about that.
Credit for my suggestions goes mostly to benc and you though.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329898"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I actually like dev0's (Post #73) way of presenting the information better. It looks less cluttered, especially the VBR table. I think it's better to restrict it to the -V x modes and to mention the whole preset history in a small footnote below. If someone has been smart enough to use the --presets, he/she will probably know a bit of the correspondence to -V already. New users, OTOH, are likely to be very confused about all this "--preset fast medium equals -V4 --vbr-new stuff". Just my opinion.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 13:15:10
Quote
And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place.

Can you please provide a link, as I have no wish to waste people's time.

I get the distinct impression that it hasn't really been concluded though... if key players like guruboolez are still unconvinced, and dev0 is open for discussion.

[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Edit: For the record I have no interest in taking part in deciding the recommended setting(s) - I have neither the hearing or the background knowledge.  I am keen to see a sensible decision to be reached though, preferably by those who do have those qualities.[/span]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: sTisTi on 2005-09-27 13:17:20
Quote
Quote
I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.

OK, thank you.

It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.

Tricky.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329914"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't think a vote is of much use. Maybe one way to present it is as some kind of curve with diminishing returns; i.e. above a certain level, you don't gain much (if any) perceived transparency by using more and more bits. The slope of this curve is different for each listener, but there is usually a point where the trade-off between more bits and more quality is ideal for a certain listener with certain demands (e.g. "transparency" => probably V2/V3  or "for portable use" => probably V4/V5).
It should be pointed out that everybody has to find this ideal point for himself, as general recommendations are impossible for diverse listeners and habits.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 13:19:37
Quote
It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329914"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's precisely why I wouldn't recommand any setting supposed to be transparent and efficient at the same time. -V2 correspond to 180-200 kbps, and it's overkill for many people. As overkill as -V0. -V5 or even -V6 could be as pertinent, but it wouldn't satisfy critical listeners. And extreme listeners wouldn't be 100% pleased with -V2.

Voting wouldn't solve the problem.
Best I'd say is to give the corresponding bitrate of each -V setting, and let people choose their preset based on bitrate or on their own experience.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 13:22:49
Agreed.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-27 13:25:04
What about something like:

VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs.
A few examples:
V5 seems to be appropriate on portable devices used in a nomadic way.
V4 seems to be appropriate is you pay a moderate/medium attention to the music.
V2 will likely be transparent to standard people.
V0 will give you the highest VBR quality, but is a bit extreme regarding bitrate/file size.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-27 13:36:26
I don't think that not giving any recommendation at all is a good idea.
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

Users want to be taken at hand and told what to use. When they have specific needs, they'll try to inform themselves and choose something which fits their need, but there are still a lot of people, who just want to convert their CDs to MP3s without thinking so much about details like which setting accomodates to their hearing.

Quote
I get the distinct impression that it hasn't really been concluded though... if key players like guruboolez are still unconvinced, and dev0 is open for discussion.

It certainly isn't. My proposal was just a result of really liking benc's suggestions and spicing it up a bit. I perceive user's proposal as too cluttered and disorganized.

Quote
And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place.

I don't know what you are talking about. Just because there are other options considered and other matters discussed (please point me to the post where -V 2 as the recommendation was discussen and I'll take that back).

I like Gabriel's idea as an addition to the "Quick Start" recommendation.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 14:01:06
Quote
I don't think that not giving any recommendation at all is a good idea.
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

It will depend of his hearing and of his own need. The storage capacity of his player could make the decision. I won't recommend -V2 to someone having a 128/256 MB player.
Problem with recommendation is: we are giving a universal answer to people having very different needs. In other words, we're answering to a question without listening to the question. Most often, the recommendation won't be really suited. And -V2 is probably not the best thing nowadays. Such encodings are filling too quickly hardware players (even HD based players).
-V2? For what? Transparency? People really looking for transparency are using lossless nowadays. And probably most people using MP3 are looking for something most efficient that the alt-preset elephant/standard.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-27 14:03:57
Quote
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

To clueless people, I'd recommand -V4
To people paying attention to the quality I'd recommand -V2
To nitpicking people I'd recommand -V0

In all cases I would not mention vbr-new, as an extra switch would already be too much, risking that new users would get even more confused.

THE question is: whom are you giving recommendations to?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 14:05:49
For all those reasons we have the complete table of -Vx settings,
to emphasize -V2 as 1 good solution (which of course does not fit to everybodys needs), we have -V2 --vbr-new as example in the case-Eac tutorial with the remark that it can be replaced.
and to tell people about the targets of -V2, -V4 etc.,  we have the remarks section, now the important switches coloured, -V2 green, -V4 yellow, -V5 orange.
Gabriels wording is of course somewhat shorter than the previous, suggested by Mooze (sorry for shortening your long complicated nick  , I hope we know, whom I mean).

about --vbr-new:
Then i would already recommend, to let the standard -V x away, so that we have only the -V x --vbr-new settings in the table.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-27 14:10:12
What about a perceived quality vs size graph?

Arbitrarily, I'd give the following quality levels:

--abr 56: 3
--abr 90: 5
-V5: 7
-V4: 8
-V3:8.5
-V2: 8.7
-V0: 9.1
-b 320: 9.2

This is purely informal, but if you trace a graph of perceived quality vs average size, you will probably obtain a nice curve with valuable indication regarding efficiency of the settings.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 14:11:45
Quote
What about a perceived quality vs size graph?

Arbitrarily, I'd give the following quality levels:

--abr 56: 3
--abr 90: 5
-V5: 7
-V4: 8
-V3:8.5
-V2: 8.7
-V0: 9.1
-b 320: 9.2

This is purely informal, but if you trace a graph of perceived quality vs average size, you will probably obtain a nice curve with valuable indication regarding efficiency of the settings.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329935"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


yes, that as graph would be valid additional info. Can somebody make the graph ?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 14:18:04
Quote
alt-preset elephant

Must have missed that hidden switch...

I think citing -V4 is pointless.  You either make a recommendation at -VX or you don't.  What's wrong with -V3? Or -V1?

I also think citing -V0 is pointless. It's the best quality VBR setting - what more can you say?

If HA wants to recommend -V2 as a standard for home listening and -V5 for portables then I can see some sense in that.  I would possibly also consider some text explaining that HA would recommend performing some tests (link to "how to abx") for the user to discover whether they require -V1, or whether -V3 or -V4 may be perfectly adequate. i.e. a link to "want to learn more..." or "how to use your own brain".

I basically agree with the following though:

Quote
Problem with recommendation is: we are giving a universal answer to people having very different needs.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 14:28:50
Quote
What about a perceived quality vs size graph?
Quote
yes, that as graph would be valid additional info. Can somebody make the graph ?

How many test files would be acceptible?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 14:32:40
Quote
I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.

as i understand, you say don't recommend V2 cause it's not always transparent, then go on on saying recommend V3 or V4, which should be "less transparent"! i think V2 is a good bet between V0 and V4 ...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-27 14:37:59
hm, where is the graph ? Can you post it again, please?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 14:39:01
Quote
Quote
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

To clueless people, I'd recommand -V4
To people paying attention to the quality I'd recommand -V2
To nitpicking people I'd recommand -V0

i think the HA primary recommendation should cover the most % of people with the least posible BR. I still think V2 is the best compromise. People are already using CBR 192KBPS, which is more or less the average of V2.

Also, the recommendation is not only for the person encoding, as most of the time, you somehow share what you encoded, by, for example, playing the encoded files throug a music system on a party (what i do), so you don't want to play all yout V4 MP3s and see a big percentage of your firends going "WTF is he playing?".

Also, as i said before, we should make a newbies recommendation, on a first post (recommending probably V2), and then we can go on on a subsecuent post, with more details for advanced users.

if we post a huge post first, 90% of people won't pay attention.

edit: also, we are recommending for people looking for quality encoding, the rest are probably encoding in WMA 64kbps.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 14:43:36
Quote
hm, where is the graph ? Can you post it again, please?
I did post this:

(http://www.neilpopham.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/temp/lame-chart.gif)

Taken from XLS (http://www.neilpopham.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/temp/lame-chart.zip) (2KB ZIP)

... but then realised that this is not what Gabriel said - it's supposed to be filesize vs quality... or are we calling that filesize?

I don't know if it was supposed to be more of a Quality/KB graph.  If so we need to do more tests to get average filesizes for these settings.  I don't mind volunteering to do a set (part of a larger set) of files.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 14:44:15
Quote
as i understand, you say don't recommend V2 cause it's not always transparent
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329942"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No.
There are two problems with -V2 as recommended setting:
- not transparent enough for some (rare probably) users.
- transparent but too big for some (most?) users. These people could get the same perceptual quality with -V3, -V4, -V5 or even -V6.

Recommending -V2 is just a legacy of the old recommendation thread. --standard was logically recommended for a simple reason: there were nothing inferior to --standard. Now we have -V3. We have -V4 also. Are they less transparent for most people than -V2? I can't answer, but I have my opinion about it.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 14:56:09
Quote
I still think V2 is the best compromise. People are already using CBR 192KBPS, which is more or less the average of V2.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329944"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I see more and more people coming back to 160 or even 128 encodings, now they have portable players with limited storage capacity.
Take a look on last multiformat listening test:

(http://rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/plot18.png)

LAME notation is superior to 4.0, which corresponds to "perceptible but not annoying". Setting was not -V2, V3 and not even V4. It was -V5.
In other word, -V5 is close to be transparent for the people (on average) which took part to this test. If -V5 is close to be transparent, I don't see why we should consider -V2 as an excellent compromise.
It's like recommending mpc --insane because --radio is already very good.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 14:58:25
Quote
LAME notation is superior to 4.0, which corresponds to "perceptible but not annoying". Setting was not -V2, V3 and not even V4. It was -V5. In other word, -V5 is close to be transparent for the people (on average) which took part to this test. If -V5 is close to be transparent, I don't see why we should consider -V2 as an excellent compromise.

i understand your point. maybe we can do a V5 to V1 test ...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 15:25:48
Quote
I see more and more people coming back to 160 or even 128 encodings, now they have portable players with limited storage capacity.

maybe we can have two basic recommendations "space is not a problem" and "limited storage". is better thatn saying "deaf people", "expert listeners", cause people don't like to call themself "deaf", and they tend to always think they are the best
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 15:35:15
Quote
Quote
I see more and more people coming back to 160 or even 128 encodings, now they have portable players with limited storage capacity.

maybe we can have two basic recommendations "space is not a problem" and "limited storage". is better thatn saying "deaf people", "expert listeners", cause people don't like to call themself "deaf", and they tend to always think they are the best
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
(http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=329960")

I prefer Gabriel's suggestion:
[a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=32288&view=findpost&p=329933]http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=329933[/url]

If space is not a concern, cbr 320 is a better choice. There are still probelm samples for LAME VBR.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 15:37:20
Quote
If space is not a concern, cbr 320 is a better choice. There are still probelm samples for LAME VBR.

i mean normal situations, if space is really not a problem, FLAC is a better option. maybe a:

Recommended settings: V2
Recommended Setting for Limited Storage: V5
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-09-27 15:40:51
Of course. But compatibility is not the same.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: stephanV on 2005-09-27 16:27:40
So... since a good recommendation based on quality on which everyone would agree seems impossible, it is only possible to give an advice based on the users particular file size requirements. (which are a. a bit rate or b. none). Now there is the situation where some people are saying -V 2 is generally good enough and others are saying -V 2 is generally overkill. Fact is, no one knows which -V setting is transparent for him/her till he actually tries it out and therefor any recommendation to achieve transparancy is inherently flawed.

IMO no particular recommendation (for transparency) should be given other than using -V and a graph/table mapping bit rates to -V settings which can help the person further in making his choice.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 16:36:34
I have created the following chart.

(http://www.neilpopham.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/temp/lame-chart-2.gif)

Taken from XLS (http://www.neilpopham.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/temp/lame-chart-2.zip) (3KB ZIP)

The data is taken from only one album file (Kings of Leon, Aha Shake Heartbreak) but is intended simply to demonstrate any potential usefulness.

I added -V1 in there, to get the unsightly kink out of the first graph (qualily value is simply the average between -V2 and -V0).

I guess the idea is, the bigger the gap between the two lines, the more quality you are getting for your MB... (-V3 best, then -V4, then -V2).

If there's any interest then we could expand/improve it.  However, bear in mind that the quailty values are subjective, and therefore limit the usefulness of the data.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Vietwoojagig on 2005-09-27 16:49:19
Question:
What is the default commandline-option if you do not specify anything?

If V2 is the recommended, the default should be V2, or am I wrong with that?

This would make it much easier to say "Hey use 'LAME x.wav x.mp3', and everything is fine. And btw it uses the default option V2"
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-27 16:51:31
Default is CBR 128

Edit: Remember, we are HA - not LAME dev.  Although we have the benefit of Gabriel's ear, and he the benefit of ours, the two are not synonymous.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: VCSkier on 2005-09-27 16:57:12
still, i think gabriel's earlier (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=32288&view=findpost&p=329922) suggestion makes the most sense.  it is simple but clear.  it does make some assumptions about the listener, but i think that is fair for the sake of simplicity.  it clearly gets the idea across to the reader, so they can make an informed decision on their own.  just my 2 cents though.

edit: typo
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-27 17:39:01
agree with grabriel:

VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs.
A few examples:

V5 seems to be appropriate on portable devices used in a nomadic way.
V4 seems to be appropriate if you pay a moderate/medium attention to the music.
V2 will likely be transparent to standard people.
V0 will give you the highest VBR quality, but is a bit extreme regarding bitrate/file size.

the graphs and such should go into the "advanced" explanation ...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2005-09-28 08:47:28
The remaining questions are if we want to keep the "Quick Start" (-V 2) recommendation or leave that out alltogether.

Are there any more oppinions regarding which layout is prefered?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-28 09:04:23
Can you update the other 2 stickies, about lame & alpha versions, and especially, which compiles are recommended ?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-28 09:14:48
Quote
These settings require Lame 3.97 or later.

These settings require Lame 3.94 or later.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: bluesky on 2005-09-28 10:10:31
[deleted]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-28 10:15:26
indeed, that is correct and on purpose. Please read the mp3-lame settings sticky topic in mp3-general forum.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-28 11:31:01
Will the final document still be a post in the forum, or a wiki page?

It seems that you have a lot better formatting tools with the wiki, and the ability to upload images.

Can you lock a wiki page so only one user can edit it?  I'm not familiar with administering a wiki.  I know it kinda goes against the idea of a wiki, but I'm sure it's possible.

Just a thought.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-09-28 11:47:44
I vote for wiki page and keeping the sticky post, both,
as newbies might find the forum, but not the wiki, or vice versa.
wiki can be different layout, of course.

ToDo list:

* update/edit of the 2 stickies:
recommended lame compiles & about lame (alpha) versions history

* wiki
^ so far I find only more tech informations about mp3/mpc etc. at wiki, but no howto guide for end-users, like the recommended settings topic ? <-- wiki will be improved, if there are also guides for end-users, like the mp3/ogg/mpc stickies.





* include link or directly the content of the recommended settings thread into the basic Lame text files, which are bundled, if you download lame.exe usually, you know, what I mean, probably:
basic.html , examples.html , modes.html , presets.html
More or less, those pages deal with the usage of Lame.
eg:
* modes.html explains about vbr, abr, cbr, but the clear hint is missing, that at given bitrate, quality should be : vbr>abr>cbr
* presets.html : deals with the medium, standard, extreme presets, but thanks to the -Vx system, we have nowadays more very good options. basically, the -Vx table of the recommended settings topic could be integrated to that page.
* basic.html: Basic command line switch reference
Only the most usual switches are described here. However those should be sufficient for the vast majority of users.

well, switches like -h etc etc. are mentioned there, abr, cbr, but no structured system regarding quality, efficiency. The recommended settings topic was years ago invented, to improve the guidance for the "vast majority of users".
maybe basic+presets+examples.html could be merged, or better structured with today's Lame knowledge.

Gabriel, do you have influence to edit these bundled Lame html pages ?


edit-addon:

sent email via HA to Gabriel, worked on  examples.html , modes.html , presets.html;
mostly presets.html, the other 2 files only minor updates, so that everything will be smooth now, no contradictions anymore, and everything updated to the fascinating qualities of lame 3.97.


* I cannot work on wiki and update of the other 2 stickies, tasks for you, somebody else, yes you, who reads this !
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-09-28 13:27:14
Quote
* modes.html explains about vbr, abr, cbr, but the clear hint is missing, that at given bitrate, quality should be : vbr>abr>cbr

I am not sure that VBR > ABR when dealing with low bitrates.


Quote
well, switches like -h etc etc. are mentioned there, abr, cbr, but no structured system regarding quality, efficiency.

This is because if we (Lame project) make some quality judgements, we usually have a flood of people claiming that we are totally wrong because they found some cases where the situation is different, or they prefer to add another option. Usually, soon after we hear things like the fact that we are not interested about quality.

ie: experience demonstrated that if we clearly expose our choices and judgements we are beeing flamed, thus I prefer to be on the safe side.

Quote
Gabriel, do you have influence to edit these bundled Lame html pages ?

Considering that usually I am the one editing them, yes. However, having time is another matter.
Feel free to send me some modified versions.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-09-28 14:09:37
Quote
The remaining questions are if we want to keep the "Quick Start" (-V 2) recommendation or leave that out alltogether.

i vote to keep it.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: PoisonDan on 2005-09-28 14:30:41
Quote
Quote
The remaining questions are if we want to keep the "Quick Start" (-V 2) recommendation or leave that out alltogether.

i vote to keep it.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=330174"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I vote not to keep it (yeah, I can be a nuisance sometimes ).

Just look at the recommended settings post for Ogg Vorbis, it doesn't specify a quick start setting either. It doesn't seem like -V 2 is the ultimate solution for everybody (for example, I use -V 4).

Should we create a poll for this?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: magic75 on 2005-09-28 16:17:07
Quote
[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']ABR (Average Bitrate)[/span]

ABR mode is a type of VBR mode where you can specify the target bitrate. Files created with the normal VBR mode will be of a higher quality than those created with the ABR mode at the same bitrate. Use ABR mode when bitrate predictability is more important than quality.

--abr n (where n is any number between 8-320)

Example: --abr 173

Very minor thing considering all the other ongoing discussions ...
I suggest adding "predictability" as above. Could otherwise possibly be misunderstood as bitrate in terms of size...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: mad_arab on 2005-09-30 12:08:01
Quote
What about a perceived quality vs size graph?

Arbitrarily, I'd give the following quality levels:

--abr 56: 3
--abr 90: 5
-V5: 7
-V4: 8
-V3:8.5
-V2: 8.7
-V0: 9.1
-b 320: 9.2

This is purely informal, but if you trace a graph of perceived quality vs average size, you will probably obtain a nice curve with valuable indication regarding efficiency of the settings.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=329935"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Seems -V3 is a good compromise for a recommendation IMO. Because you gain little quality in going to -V2 while file size increases more than the perceived quality gain. At the same time it is notches above the still decent -V4 and -V5 which has been tested to still sound very good.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: mad_arab on 2005-09-30 12:09:10
BTW, is there a plan to make the -AP settings use vbr-new in the final version?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-09-30 12:13:53
I can't find it now, but I have seen Gabriel state unequivocally (in a post quite possibly on this thread) that --vbr-new will not be the default in 3.97.

Edit: Here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=32288&view=findpost&p=329424)it is.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: benc on 2005-10-01 01:24:50
Quote
Quote
[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']ABR (Average Bitrate)[/span]

ABR mode is a type of VBR mode where you can specify the target bitrate. Files created with the normal VBR mode will be of a higher quality than those created with the ABR mode at the same bitrate. Use ABR mode when bitrate predictability is more important than quality.

--abr n (where n is any number between 8-320)

Example: --abr 173

Very minor thing considering all the other ongoing discussions ...
I suggest adding "predictability" as above. Could otherwise possibly be misunderstood as bitrate in terms of size...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=330197"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I agree and I was thinking of something similar when I was re-reading my original post.

---

As for which -V preset to tell people to use, maybe something like this could be included after a table showing the bitrates for each setting:

Quote
The VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs. There is no "correct" quality level to use, and the following is only a suggestion to help you get started:

For portables devices with limited storage capacity try V5, V6 or V7.
For normal high quality usages try V3 or V4.
For transparency try V2 or better.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-03 13:22:05
What about this quickstart:


[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']
QUICKSTART
[/span]


low bitrate (1CD DVD Rip, radio recording, mono encodings...): for inferior bitrate to 100 kbps, ABR is probably the best solution. Just use --abr xx (ex: --abr 80).

portable: -V6 (~115 kbps), -V5 (~130 kbps) or -V4 (~160 kbps) are recommended for this usage. -V6 produces average but decent quality, whereas -V4 should already be close to perceptual transparency.

(very) high quality: -V3 (~175 kbps), V2 (~190 kbps), V1 (~210 kbps) or V0 (~230 kbps). Transparent encodings. Audible difference among these presets exists but is really marginal.

[optional]
Best quality (archiving): cbr 320. This is the strongest setting for LAME MP3. Lowest risk of artefacts. But keep in mind that except really few situations quality is rarely better than for highest VBR profiles described previously. That's why cbr 320 is called "insane" and is not recommended for a simple listening purpose.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kritip on 2005-10-03 13:47:45
Quote
That's why cbr 320 is called "insane" and is not recommended for a simple listening purpose.


Is is still called insane then? If all the other -preset xxxxx are now legacy in favour of -V x then is it stilll correct to call it insane?? Forgive me if im way off the mark though. Otherwise, it looks a good quickstart.

Kristian
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: shadowking on 2005-10-03 13:50:28
I am voting against recommending V2 and I really like this quickstart !
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-03 13:51:19
--preset insane is still working (legacy). I'd rather use -cbr 320 commandline.  That's why I didn't mention --preset insane, but just "insane".
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: VCSkier on 2005-10-03 14:44:58
i like this as the quickstart as well  my only question, is this, is abr recommended for everything below -V6?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-03 14:54:07
Quote
i like this as the quickstart as well  my only question, is this, is abr recommended for everything below -V6?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331278"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are not enough tests to answer.
From my (small) experience, I'd use ABR. But there are maybe more experienced listeners than me.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Donunus on 2005-10-03 14:56:36
For people with ipods that use mp3s, preset insane is not really insane because its the preset that doesn't skip. hehehe
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kwanbis on 2005-10-03 15:49:30
Quote
What about this quickstart:

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']
QUICKSTART
[/span]

low bitrate (1CD DVD Rip, radio recording, mono encodings...): for inferior bitrate to 100 kbps, ABR is probably the best solution. Just use --abr xx (ex: --abr 80).

portable: -V6 (~115 kbps), -V5 (~130 kbps) or -V4 (~160 kbps) are recommended for this usage. -V6 produces average but decent quality, whereas -V4 should already be close to perceptual transparency.

(very) high quality: -V3 (~175 kbps), V2 (~190 kbps), V1 (~210 kbps) or V0 (~230 kbps). Transparent encodings. Audible difference among these presets exists but is really marginal.

[optional]
Best quality (archiving): cbr 320. This is the strongest setting for LAME MP3. Lowest risk of artefacts. But keep in mind that except really few situations quality is rarely better than for highest VBR profiles described previously. That's why cbr 320 is called "insane" and is not recommended for a simple listening purpose.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331250"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

looks nice for me ... simple but explanatori
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Frank Bicking on 2005-10-03 16:21:17
Get rid of the colors.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Jojo on 2005-10-04 05:48:42
Quote
I am voting against recommending V2 and I really like this quickstart !
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331257"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm voting in favor for recommending V2.

Quote
Get rid of the colors.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331296"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I like the colors, makes it easier to read
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-10-04 08:49:50
Can I suggest the text/formatting below?

The format is simple and easily transferred to the wiki (I personally believe that the thread should only point to the wiki, so there isn't duplicated information, but hey).  I have used links to suggest where... um... links could be*.  I have changed guruboolez's text slightly, I hope it still retains his intentions.  It's only my suggestion anyway - mainly for a tasteful and consistent formatting.  I find a lot of the colours difficult to read.  Colours may be acceptable to distinguish  headings, but reading a lot of text in orange is just painful.

One other note:  if --cbr 320 is "not recommended" should it be in this recommendation?  If the page is actually to be a summary of LAME's features then it certainly needs detailing - but I would suggest it maybe shouldn't be in the Quick Start if not recommended.


[span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%']Quick Start[/span]

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Low Bitrate[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : (S)VCD audio rip, radio or mono encoding, etc.[/span]

For very low bitrates, up to 100kbps, ABR (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) is most often the best solution.
Use --abr xx (e.g. --abr 80).

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Portable[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : background noise and low bitrate (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) requirement[/span]

-V6 (~115 kbps), -V5 (~130 kbps) or -V4 (~160 kbps) are recommended for this use.
-V6 produces an acceptable quality, while -V4 should be close to perceptual transparency (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk).

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']High Quality[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : home or quiet listening[/span]

-V3 (~175 kbps), -V2 (~190 kbps), -V1 (~210 kbps) or -V0 (~230 kbps) are recommended.
These settings will produce transparent (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) encoding.  Audible differences between these presets (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) exist, but are extremely marginal.

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Best Quality[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : archiving[/span]

--cbr 320. This is the strongest setting for LAME (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) MP3 (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk), with the lowest risk of artifacts (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk).
With the exception of a few situations, quality is rarely better than the highest VBR (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) profiles (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) described above. There is a reason that --cbr 320 is called "insane (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk)".  It is not recommended.

--
* Either for the wiki, or in the thread - either pointing to wiki pages or other threads.  We should be using links more so that noobs can jump from one place to another and have all their questions answered in one go.

Edit : added more links! Edit 2: Amended text following suggestions.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-04 09:30:45
I prefer your version
It's better in my opinion to the current recommendations remaped as "Remarks":

Quote
The presets -V 0 , -V 1 , -V 2 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. [span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](transparent = most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in an ABX blindtest)[/span]
For high quality on portable MP3 players, you may use  -V 4 or  -V 5 (--vbr-new) (around 165 kbit/s, or around 128k).
-b 320 (or --preset insane): maximum quality possible, very high bitrate (always 320 kbps).
-V0 --vbr-new (or --preset fast extreme) exceptionally high quality, somewhat high bitrate,  allows faster encoding and a bit higher quality than normal -V 2 (--preset extreme) (typically 220—270 kbps).
-V2 --vbr-new (or --preset fast standard) generally transparent preset to most people, almost indistinguishable from --preset extreme, good size/quality tradeoff, allows faster encoding and a bit higher quality than normal -V 2 (--preset standard) (typically 180—240 kbps).
-V4 --vbr-new (or --preset fast medium) mostly transparent preset, extremely suitable for noisy environments and portable use, very good size/quality tradeoff (typically 110—170 kbps).
-V 5 --vbr-new is a very good replacement for 128 kbit/s encodings, eg. portable usage in cars, noisy environments.


V1 or V3 are not even mentioned! The old --alt-preset system is maybe outdated, but the logical (--standard/extreme/medium and nothing between) is still haunting the thread. 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: stephanV on 2005-10-04 09:55:55
Quote
[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Low Bitrate[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : (S)VCD audio rip, radio or mono encoding, etc.[/span]

For inferior bitrates, up to 100kbps, ABR (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) is most often the best solution.
Use --abr xx (e.g. --abr 80).

Maybe "inferior" could be replaced with a different word (just "low" I guess)? For me it has a very negative tone to it, which makes the recommendation more like a dissuasion.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Madrigal on 2005-10-04 10:26:01
Quote
-V3 (~175 kbps), -V2 (~190 kbps), -V1 (~210 kbps) or -V0 (~230 kbps) are recommended.
These settings will produce transparent (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) encoding.  Audible difference among these presets (http://www.synthetic-soul.co.uk) exists, but are extremely marginal.

Grammar:

Use either

"Audible difference ... exists, but is extremely marginal"

or

"Audible differences ... exist, but are extremely marginal"

Regards,
Madrigal
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-10-04 10:33:45
Quote
Maybe "inferior" could be replaced with a different word (just "low" I guess)? For me it has a very negative tone to it, which makes the recommendation more like a dissuasion.
Sounds sensible.  I agree.
Quote
Grammar
Sorry, my fault.  I read the original text wrongly.

I would suggest "Audible differences between these presets exist, but are extremely marginal.".


I'm not sure where this is all going.  I see that 3.97b is now official, so I'm not sure that the thread is going to change anyway...

Edit: updated my original post to reflect these suggestions.

Edit 2: I feel as though I'm jumping on the bandwagon a bit, by stealing someone else's idea and saying "Look at me, I've made it better!", but this is not my intention.  I would simply ask that the thread, including the Quick Start passage, have clear, concise text with consistent formatting.  On the whole, I liked benc/dev0's formatting for the VBR/ABR/CBR explanations.

I also really like the idea of utilising links on keywords - either pointing to a wiki page or thread on HA, or a wiki page on wikipedia.org (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_%28data_compression%29).  My suggestion would be the HA wiki.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-10-04 11:56:13
So I have incorporated latest ideas.

The idea of linking keywords with wiki content or topics of HA is a good one, I just need hints here, which keyword together with link.
The wiki needs still a major workup, eg. see the eac ripping section about lame/mp3, where are the alt-presets dominant, still.

edit:

hm, btw. the recommendation to use MP3 for (S)VCD, low bitrates, is that possible ?
IIRC, (S)VCD requires MP2 (eg. toolame) by definition, standard ?!
hm, I think, if I am correct, that mp3 is not possible for S/VCD, then I think the mistake crawled in, as Kwanbis wrote about CD/DVD rip, and somebody else rewrote it to SVCD, never mind.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-10-04 12:45:34
Quote
So I have incorporated latest ideas.
Thank you, though I have to say I still find the formatting confusing.

Quote
hm, btw. the recommendation to use MP3 for (S)VCD, low bitrates, is that possible ?
IIRC, (S)VCD requires MP2 (eg. toolame) by definition, standard ?!
hm, I think, if I am correct, that mp3 is not possible for S/VCD, then I think the mistake crawled in, as Kwanbis wrote about CD/DVD rip, and somebody else rewrote it to SVCD, never mind.
I only looked at Guruboolez's text.  That used "1 CD DVD rip".  I took "1 CD DVD" to mean a VCD or SVCD, i.e.: a DVD that had been ripped to a CD.  It does seem that there is some confusion, certainly on my part!  Maybe it should simply be removed.  I think "Voice, radio, mono encoding, etc.".

Quote
The idea of linking keywords with wiki content or topics of HA is a good one, I just need hints here, which keyword together with link.
The wiki needs still a major workup, eg. see the eac ripping section about lame/mp3, where are the alt-presets dominant, still.

[span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%']Quick Start[/span]

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Low Bitrate[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : voice, radio or mono (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Mono) encoding, etc.[/span]

For very low bitrates, up to 100kbps, ABR (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABR) is most often the best solution.
Use --abr xx (e.g. --abr 80).

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Portable[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : background noise and low bitrate (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Bitrate) requirement[/span]

-V6 (~115 kbps), -V5 (~130 kbps) or -V4 (~160 kbps) are recommended for this use.
-V6 produces an acceptable quality, while -V4 should be close to perceptual transparency (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Transparency).

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']High Quality[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : home or quiet listening[/span]

-V3 (~175 kbps), -V2 (~190 kbps), -V1 (~210 kbps) or -V0 (~230 kbps) are recommended.
These settings will produce transparent (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Transparency) encoding.  Audible differences between these presets (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#Encoder_Presets) exist, but are extremely marginal.

[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Best Quality[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : archiving[/span]

--cbr 320. This is the strongest setting for LAME (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME) MP3 (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=MP3), with the lowest risk of artifacts (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Artifacts).
With the exception of a few situations, quality is rarely better than the highest VBR profiles (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#VBR_.28Variable_bitrate.29_settings) described above. There is a reason that --cbr 320 is called "insane (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#CBR_.28constant_bitrate.29_settings)".  It is not recommended.


Please note - the link to "Artifacts" currently points to a non-existent page.  Perhaps someone who knows what they are talking about could populate one?


[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']Quick Start[/span]

Best Quality
: archiving

--cbr 320. This is the strongest setting for LAME (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME) MP3 (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=MP3), with the lowest risk of artifacts (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Artifacts).
With the exception of a few situations, quality is rarely better than the highest VBR profiles (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#VBR_.28Variable_bitrate.29_settings) described below.

High Quality : home or quiet listening

-V3 --vbr-new (~175 kbps), -V2 --vbr-new (~190 kbps), -V1 --vbr-new (~210 kbps) or -V0 --vbr-new (~230 kbps) are recommended.
These settings will produce transparent (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Transparency) encoding.
Audible differences between these presets (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#Encoder_Presets) exist, but are extremely marginal.

Portable : background noise and low bitrate (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Bitrate)  requirement

-V6 --vbr-new  (~115 kbps), -V5 --vbr-new (~130 kbps) or -V4 --vbr-new (~160 kbps) are recommended for this use.
-V6 --vbr-new produces an acceptable quality, while -V4--vbr-new  should be close to perceptual transparency (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Transparency).

Very Low Bitrate : voice, radio or mono (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Mono) encoding

For very low bitrates, up to 100kbps, ABR (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABR) is most often the best solution.
Use --abr xx (e.g. --abr 80).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-04 13:29:26
Quote
I only looked at Guruboolez's text.  That used "1 CD DVD rip". 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331494"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I meant DVD -> single CD.
For a 2-CD DVD rip, low audio bitrate is maybe not really ideal.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: boiling_ice2k4 on 2005-10-04 19:14:04
Quote
Current knowledge qualitywise comparing vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artefact, which is worse in --vbr-new compared to default.


This is somewhat confusing as I've been using -V 2 --vbr-new for transcoding from FLAC. Are there any specific samples that are known to cause problems?  I've never experienced the "artefacting" mentioned here
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Maurits on 2005-10-04 23:41:41
Quote
[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Portable[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : background noise and low bitrate (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Bitrate) requirement[/span]

Wouldn't it make more sense to replace 'low bitrate requirement' with 'small size requirement'.
I think it's not the bitrate anyone cares about actually but the implications a certain bitrate has for quality and size. In this case (portables) it's size that matters, low bitrate is only a method to reach the actual goal: small size.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2005-10-05 09:28:33
Quote
Wouldn't it make more sense to replace 'low bitrate requirement' with 'small size requirement'.

Makes sense, yes.  I agree. Needs to be better worded I think ("size" is a relative thing - at least that's what I tell the wife).  Something like "minimal file size requirement" - maybe "optimum file size"... maybe "minimal KB requirement"...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Madrigal on 2005-10-05 12:54:43
Quote
Something like "minimal file size requirement" - maybe "optimum file size"... maybe "minimal KB requirement"...

How about "low storage space requirement" ?

Regards,
Madrigal
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: R.A.F. on 2005-10-06 04:38:20
Quote
In terms of quality VBR is better than ABR which is better than CBR.

VBR is recommended when quality is the most important. VBR produces files with constant quality but with a varying bitrate, usually within certain limits. Recommended VBR settings:
-V0 [insert target bitrate range here]
-V1 [as above]
-V2 [as above] - usually transparant for most [recommended transparant setting]
-V3 [as above]
-V4 [as above]
-V5 [as above] - a good 128kbps CBR replacement
-V6 [as above]
-V7 [as above]
-V8 [as above]

ABR is recommended when file size predictability is important. The file produced is still VBR but the final bitrate usually ends up within +-5(?) kbps from target bitrate. Recommended ABR setting:

-abr target_bitrate

CBR is recommended when constant bitrate is required troughout the file, eg. streaming etc.?

-abr bitrate

---
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=327196"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think these hints from magic75 should be taken anyhow to the explanations of the use of the new lame-codec switches. I find them excellent for people, who don´t know much about all the discussions about the best settings.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Maurits on 2005-10-07 16:32:38
Quote
Quote
Something like "minimal file size requirement" - maybe "optimum file size"... maybe "minimal KB requirement"...

How about "low storage space requirement" ?

Regards,
Madrigal
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=331818"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd say "minimal file size requirement" and "low storage space requirement" are the best options.

Let's bear in mind that most people actually reading this manual (and especially the Quick Start!) are not your average HA-readers or Lame-experts. They're bound to be people who've been pointed in the general direction of Lame by a friend, Google or some website because they we're told that Lame would create 'better' MP3's. That is why I think using simple to understand, straight-to-the-point, not too technical manuals is very important.

Users who want to create 22.500 samplerate, mono, VBR-new, lowest bitrate 173Kbps, highest bitrate 201Kbps, without replaygain, with lowpass 16000 and what-have-you MP3's will read on past the Quick Start for the more specialist switches. 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Weird Music Mafia on 2005-10-07 22:40:12
What's up with 3.97b1?? Are we finally there where Xing was years ago???

I always used --alt-preset standard or --alt-preset extreme in 3.90.3 resp. 3.96.1 and besides small differences in transparency the sound has been excellent. And the frequency range up to the highpass filter entrance was perfect!

Today I've tried the 3.97b1 with --alt-preset fast extreme and -V 0

Both settings cut off all frequencies > 16 kHz most of the time - only above a certain dynamics level (~ -70 dB) those frequencies >16 kHz are saved during compression (tested all output files with CoolEdit)

What's going wrong here???    Is this because qval=3 is used instead of qval=2 (which was used in 3.90.3s preset extreme)?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Shade[ST] on 2005-10-07 23:05:22
Quote
What's up with 3.97b1?? Are we finally there where Xing was years ago???

I always used --alt-preset standard or --alt-preset extreme in 3.90.3 resp. 3.96.1 and besides small differences in transparency the sound has been excellent. And the frequency range up to the highpass filter entrance was perfect!

Today I've tried the 3.97b1 with --alt-preset fast extreme and -V 0

Both settings cut off all frequencies > 16 kHz most of the time - only above a certain dynamics level (~ -70 dB) those frequencies >16 kHz are saved during compression (tested all output files with CoolEdit)

What's going wrong here???    Is this because qval=3 is used instead of qval=2 (which was used in 3.90.3s preset extreme)?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=332493"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

How about you drop your graphic waveform software, take your ears out of the box from which they never served, and perform an ABX test?  After that, report the results on a new, unagressive thread, and, if they're revealing, help LAME developpement through your experience!

I think _THAT_ would be a good idea.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Drenholm on 2005-10-13 13:07:07
Out of interest, could someone please point me in the direction of the test(s) which resulted in --vbr-new being adopted as recommended? Thanks.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-13 13:15:37
• My tests (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=34270&st=0&p=300681&#entry300681)
• Bug80 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35905&view=findpost&p=316811)

There are maybe other tests, but I don't remember them.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Drenholm on 2005-10-13 13:17:54
Thank you, guruboolez!

I knew there'd be one by you.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Old Nick on 2005-10-19 09:32:05
I've always used [--alt-preset standard -Y] to save space since I'm unable to hear anything above 16 KHz anyway. Now when I'm switching to 3.97, should I use [-V 2 -Y] or [-V 3]? I thought these two were identical, but they give me different filesizes.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Yaztromo on 2005-10-19 09:57:42
Quote
Quote
What's up with 3.97b1?? Are we finally there where Xing was years ago???

I always used --alt-preset standard or --alt-preset extreme in 3.90.3 resp. 3.96.1 and besides small differences in transparency the sound has been excellent. And the frequency range up to the highpass filter entrance was perfect!

Today I've tried the 3.97b1 with --alt-preset fast extreme and -V 0

Both settings cut off all frequencies > 16 kHz most of the time - only above a certain dynamics level (~ -70 dB) those frequencies >16 kHz are saved during compression (tested all output files with CoolEdit)

What's going wrong here???    Is this because qval=3 is used instead of qval=2 (which was used in 3.90.3s preset extreme)?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=332493"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

How about you drop your graphic waveform software, take your ears out of the box from which they never served, and perform an ABX test?  After that, report the results on a new, unagressive thread, and, if they're revealing, help LAME developpement through your experience!

I think _THAT_ would be a good idea.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=332501"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



Woah. I think you BOTH need to calm down.

WMM asked a fairly legitimate question, even if his tone was wrong.

I can't hear any difference, but it would be interesting to know why the lowpass is now more aggressive. This could make the sound degrade for the younger listeners amongst us.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-10-19 12:55:10
This is the effect of the ATH. High freqs that are below the ATH are removed, and in the high freqs area, the ATH is very high.
Basically Lame is filtering freqs you can not hear.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: hödyr on 2005-10-19 17:29:58
Quote
I've always used [--alt-preset standard -Y] to save space since I'm unable to hear anything above 16 KHz anyway. Now when I'm switching to 3.97, should I use [-V 2 -Y] or [-V 3]? I thought these two were identical, but they give me different filesizes.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=335600"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-V2 is equivalent to --alt-preset standard, so I suggest you try -V2 -Y. I'm using -V2 --vbr-new -Y myself, my files come around 180kbps.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: woody_woodward on 2005-10-19 17:37:22
LAME sure has a lot of switches.....  Just an observation.  No opinions implied.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Wombat on 2005-10-19 18:39:56
Relating to --vbr-new i have my old samples i already mentioned degraded with V2 regarding 3.96 vs. 3.97b1.
Using 3.97b1 -V2 --vbr-new with the birds and the sophia2 sample now should be easy "audible to really everyone" what problem i always talk about.
You may try this?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: alfa156 on 2005-10-24 06:48:01
why was razorlame replaced with all2lame?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kjoonlee on 2005-10-24 07:21:29
I'm not sure, but razorlame was choking on Replaygain messages from newer versions of LAME. Maybe that was why.

edit: grammar
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: rsadix on 2005-10-25 04:51:57
Thanx for the post Synthetic Soul - post #70:  How to get around lame halting if you pass an incorrect genre.  It always seemed to get me when I was in a hurry or showing someone how great tagging was with EAC.  I had to create another profile in EAC when I was compressing wav files without the CD.  Now that problem is solved.  Also I think the graph you presented in post #117 is awesome.  A picture is worth a thousand words.

This post is great!  Its up to seven pages now, and even though it is getting rather long, figuring out the settings to use with 3.97b1 is much shorter than just a year ago trying to figure out what the "ideal" settings were for 3.90.3 and 3.96.1.  I'm swithcing from 3.96.1 to 3.97b1 and its only taken me this post to figure out what settings I am going to use, compared to the days of research it took in the 3.93 and 3.95 days.  Most of the time this time was spent on considering to use --vbr-new or not. 

I like the quick start guide concept, but I see a lot of discussion about the "recommended" settings for new users and what the aptitude of the reader is.  I personally use -V1, but instead of defending that I would rather see the quick start guide simply recommend and encourage users to encode a song they are familiar with using several settings from -V5 to -V0 (even give the exact command lines to cut and paste) and playing them on whatever device is going to be used and encourage them to decide on a setting for themselves instead of trying to convince someone which setting they should use (this naturally encourages the defense mechaninsm).  I think this will prevent a lot of back and forth of, "I was thinking of using this setting, is this a good idea..."  and "what about this..."  If you give them the settings to cut and paste they can just figure it out themselves.  That's why I come to the forum; to learn what my options are, try them out and choose what works best for me. 

I also think having an easy tutorial of what the command line options are is important and not too complicated for an HA reader.  Because of this forum I use the following command line:

-V 1 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" --tc "EAC lame 3.97b1 -V 1 vbr 210" %s %d

Thanx everyone for your input so I could come up with this.

Last suggestion; I don't see any mention of encoding audio books/speeches/mono sources.  I tried several versions in the 3.93 days of vbr, abr and cbr with different settings, sampling frequencies, low pass filters etc. and could never match --preset-voice.  It sounds awesome and gives about 25x compression.  I'd like to see this setting in the guide.

I think it is normal in the learning curve of using EAC and lame with the power of the command line to question the "presets".  I know I did, and when I participated in the forums I got slammed whenever I asked a question or presented something outside of the presets.  I'm glad this forum presents the tagging commands, as it gives the new people something to chew on.  So maybe an intro into how the presets were developed and how long they have been tweaked (years) might help squelch some of the "innocent" questions that come from people who obviously have not read much of the HA forums.

Great work people!
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-10-27 07:13:36
This thread is pretty long and I just got in on it, so I hope the following question is not a repeat.

Can I use the recommended settings for LAME 3.97 that's stickied in this forum for my LAME 3.96.1?  I don't want a beta encoder, that's why I'm still staying with the older but "unbuggy" 3.96.1.  Ideally, I'd like to use ~192 kbps for VBR (I used to use CBR until I found out that it's not as good as VBR).  Maybe -V2 or -V3.  Thanks in advance.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-10-27 07:36:46
OK, I just ran lame from the command line for the first time.  Previously, I used to encode my music as CBR via the LAME plug-in that I have for GoldWave.  Anyway, here's the output.  Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean?  Thanks.

C:\Program Files\LAME>lame -V 2 --vbr-new "<directory_path\file_name.wav>" "<directory_path\file_name.mp3>"
LAME version 3.96.1 (http://lame.sourceforge.net/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), 3DNow! (ASM used), SSE, SSE2
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 18671 Hz - 19205 Hz
Encoding <directory_path\file_name.wav>
      to <directory_path\file_name.mp3>
Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=2) j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (ca. 7.3x) qval=3
    Frame          |  CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU |    ETA
167050/167052(100%)|    4:42/    4:42|    4:42/    4:42|  15.447x|    0:00
32 [    31] *
128 [  2564] %***
160 [ 16901] %%*******************
192 [ 43138] %%%%%%%***********************************************
224 [ 53440] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************************************
256 [ 35980] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************
320 [ 14999] %%%%%%%%%%%%*******
average: 223.3 kbps  LR: 42165 (25.24%)  MS: 124888 (74.76%)

Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -7.7dB

C:\Program Files\LAME>
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: stephanV on 2005-10-27 08:18:58
Quote
Can I use the recommended settings for LAME 3.97 that's stickied in this forum for my LAME 3.96.1?

You can use anything you want, but its not recommended. 

Quote
Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean?


Left-Right stereo and Mid-Side stereo. Two different ways of representing stereo sound, sometimes one is more effiecient than the other.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-10-27 16:13:02
suggestion: I don't see any mention of encoding audio books/speeches/mono sources. I tried several versions in the 3.93 days of vbr, abr and cbr with different settings, sampling frequencies, low pass filters etc. and could never match --preset-voice. It sounds awesome and gives about 25x compression. I'd like to see this setting in the guide.

Is there such a preset working in 3.97b1 ?
Does it deliver the best for the goal/bitrate ?
of course, then it belongs to the recommended settings.
Can you give the necessary informations regarding averaged bitrates, if it is mono or not ?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-10-27 16:35:31
--preset voice is only available in the command line front-end, and is there for compatibility.
It is currently mapped to --abr 56 -mm, so that means that the recommendation would be to encode in mono, and use abr. As simple as that.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-10-28 00:44:12
Quote
Quote
Can I use the recommended settings for LAME 3.97 that's stickied in this forum for my LAME 3.96.1?

You can use anything you want, but its not recommended. 

OK, haha, you're right, I can use anything I guess.  But what would the recommended settings be for LAME 3.96.1 to be roughly equivalent to 3.97's -V2 setting?  Thanks.

Quote
Quote
Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean?


Left-Right stereo and Mid-Side stereo. Two different ways of representing stereo sound, sometimes one is more effiecient than the other.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337563"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks, that makes sense.  I guess it's for statistical purposes only, and to me, the #s dont' mean much until I can compare it with other compressions.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: stephanV on 2005-10-28 09:10:25
Lame 3.96.1 also has the -V setting right? So use -V 2 or -V 3 (whatever fits your bit rate needs better) and be happy
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Pearson on 2005-10-31 22:08:01
This is quoted from the 'Quick Start' section of the "List of recommended LAME settings" thread:

Quote
Very low bitrate, small sizes: eg. for voice, radio, mono encoding etc.
--abr xx (e.g. --abr 80)


Shouldn't there be a suggested setting for mono encoding in "High Quality" as well? There are good mono recordings that would be served by a HQ mono setting. From the recommendation above it sounds as if mono should be encoded with abr.

In the old days I think there was some kind of (albeit weak) consensus that -m m -b 80 could be added to the old --preset standard setting for mono encoding. Does this work OK with 3.97 as well?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2005-10-31 23:38:54
Quote
In the old days I think there was some kind of (albeit weak) consensus that -m m -b 80 could be added to the old --preset standard setting for mono encoding. Does this work OK with 3.97 as well?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=338625"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

-b80 is not necessary anymore with -vbr-new mode. But with the other VBR mode, I think that -b128 is still here by default. Therefore, -b80 should be worth.



EDIT: typo.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Pearson on 2005-11-01 00:02:59
Thanks for the clarification!
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: LiTEMaTTeR on 2005-11-03 00:04:22
In lame 3.97b does it store the setting used like the lame 3.90.3 modified compile did? In other words, if -V 2 = APS will the lameheader file indicate V2/APS was used somewhere?

On a diff note if V2 = APS on this compile then why do they get different bitrate avgs?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Jojo on 2005-11-03 07:13:00
Quote
In lame 3.97b does it store the setting used like the lame 3.90.3 modified compile did? In other words, if -V 2 = APS will the lameheader file indicate V2/APS was used somewhere?

yes, this fuction was introduced in one of the recent lame releases and was backported to the old and unefficient Lame 3.90.3 release.
Quote
On a diff note if V2 = APS on this compile then why do they get different bitrate avgs?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=339157"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

no, --preset standard and -V2 produces the exact same file (therefore same bitrate).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: burnett_s on 2005-11-05 05:43:29
Hi everybody,

By default, ReplayGain analysis is enabled afaik it is not compatible with foobar's RG tag and portable mp3 players. So, wouldn't be better to add --noreplaygain to the command line to disable ReplayGain analysis and prevent LAME from applying gain to each track individually instead of to the album as a whole ?
Encoding a live or mixed album track by track, not as an image, with this command line option enabled isn't such a good idea, isn't it? 

ReplayGain disabled: -V2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain

EAC's command line with replaygain disabled:
Code: [Select]
-V 2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain  --ignore-tag-errors --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" %s %d


Please correct me if I'm wrong 

Greetings

EDIT: typo
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Madrigal on 2005-11-05 08:04:46
Quote
Hi everybody,

By default, ReplayGain analysis is enabled afaik it is not compatible with foobar's RG tag and portable mp3 players. So, wouldn't be better to add --noreplaygain to the command line to disable ReplayGain analysis and prevent LAME from applying gain to each track individually instead of to the album as a whole ?
Encoding a live or mixed album track by track, not as an image, with this command line option enabled isn't such a good idea, isn't it? 

ReplayGain disabled: -V2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain

EAC's command line with replaygain disabled:
Code: [Select]
-V 2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain  --ignore-tag-errors --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" %s %d


Please correct me if I'm wrong 

Greetings

EDIT: typo
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=339651"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought LAME's replaygain analysis was for screen display only, during operation, and had nothing at all to do with applying gain to the tracks themselves. I have confirmed this to myself several times, using Mp3Gain.

That said, use of the --noreplaygain switch can still be useful. In my case at least, it speeds up the encoding process considerably.

Regards,
Madrigal
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kjoonlee on 2005-11-05 09:23:58
RG metadata is written to the LAME/INFO tag. The only program that I know of that uses that info is Otachan's in_mpg123.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2005-11-05 11:20:35
It is also used by Madplay.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Madrigal on 2005-11-05 18:47:39
@kjoonlee & Gabriel:

Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,
Madrigal
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-11-06 18:09:39
Now that I'm using LAME 3.97 beta (despite my paranoia of beta software), I'm wondering if it's worth using --preset extreme (VBR) over --preset standard (VBR).  In a double-blind test, is the slight difference in quality discernable by a good pair of ears?  Thanks.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2005-11-28 10:42:36
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Shade[ST] on 2005-11-28 12:16:34
Quote
Now that I'm using LAME 3.97 beta (despite my paranoia of beta software), I'm wondering if it's worth using --preset extreme (VBR) over --preset standard (VBR).  In a double-blind test, is the slight difference in quality discernable by a good pair of ears?  Thanks.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=340068"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

to make a quick answer, probably not, but you can check yourself.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: VCSkier on 2005-11-28 20:09:00
for me v2 is transparent on all but a very few, extreme problem samples...  i dont recall which ones at the moment, but in real music situations, i have yet to find a sample that i can abx.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Hyrok on 2005-11-28 20:39:55
For me V3 is almost transparent and it gives a good balance between quality and file size.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-11-29 03:45:25
Quote
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=345894")

[a href="http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm]You're right.[/url]  But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder.  LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: burnett_s on 2005-11-29 04:34:38
Quote
Quote
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=345894")

[a href="http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm]You're right.[/url]  But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder.  LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346148"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


IMHO, official recommendation should be updated to use LAME 3.97 beta 2 instead of beta 1 as the recommended LAME encoder version.

Gr.
Gonzalo
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2005-11-29 05:07:33
Quote
Quote
Quote
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=345894")

[a href="http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Lame_Encoder.htm]You're right.[/url]  But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder.  LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346148"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


IMHO, official recommendation should be updated to use LAME 3.97 beta 2 instead of beta 1 as the recommended LAME encoder version.

Gr.
Gonzalo
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346152"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I PM'd "user" about it, so hopefully he'll update the first post of the thread and that someone will change the link from that 3rd sticky in this forum.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: JayShoemaker on 2006-06-16 21:39:40
You can add Tag&Rename to the Tagging Software section...

Very good software!

http://www.softpointer.com/tr.htm (http://www.softpointer.com/tr.htm)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: user on 2006-06-17 19:25:39
You can add Tag&Rename to the Tagging Software section...

Very good software!

http://www.softpointer.com/tr.htm (http://www.softpointer.com/tr.htm)


thanks, you & EmSiV cause work for moderators to split these 3 posts from the sticky topic to the discussion topic.
What have you thought replying here, when nobody replies here, and there are 2 big red links "discussion has been moved here and here" ?!

As Tag&Rename isn't freeware, it costs around 24 bucks, I am reluctant to add it (though I'd do it, when somebody comments knowledgeful on my following thoughts), as there are excellent free alternatives, Speeks Front end etc., and:
the more uncommented alternatives, the more the newbie gets irritated. This should be a straight forward List with best filtered settings/software. Eg., we don't mention or recommend MP3-Fraunhofer, which might (have been) be at certain settings competitive to comparable MP3-Lame, as Lame-Mp3 covers it.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: EmSiV on 2006-07-08 16:21:40
Another good, powerful (and free!) tagging & renaming tool: The Godfather ( http://users.otenet.gr/~jtcliper/tgf/ (http://users.otenet.gr/~jtcliper/tgf/) )

Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DJDiabolik on 2006-07-24 12:13:56
hello, 
when i read all the material, in the initial post, i got the impression that the insane preset - 320 kbps CBR matches quality with my current custom preset for Lame encoder: 3.97b2, VBR - OLD, V0, Q=0, kbps range: 192 - 320, but produces  larger file.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: audiomars on 2006-07-24 13:43:55
hello, 
when i read all the material, in the initial post, i got the impression that the insane preset - 320 kbps CBR matches quality with my current custom preset for Lame encoder: 3.97b2, VBR - OLD, V0, Q=0, kbps range: 192 - 320, but produces  larger file.


ABX, ABX!! The two settings you mention are completely different.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: dev0 on 2006-07-24 14:08:25
hello, 
when i read all the material, in the initial post, i got the impression that the insane preset - 320 kbps CBR matches quality with my current custom preset for Lame encoder: 3.97b2, VBR - OLD, V0, Q=0, kbps range: 192 - 320, but produces  larger file.


That's not the case. One of them is a (quite braindead) VBR setting, the other CBR.
It's not recommended to limit the range of bitrates when using VBR.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DJDiabolik on 2006-07-29 10:54:03
to: audiomars
it was ABX test belive me. it was quite a test. 
when i made the tests, i was listening to the files lot of times each, on various of players and speakers. i even made different combinations with different players and different speakers. 
They are different yes but i'm interested of filesize and quality. for me it is not important is the algorithm CBR or VBR. Yes theoritically CBR 320 should produce the best quality that mp3 format can achive. But if you put it to practice conditions, 320 CBR makes some improovements that you cannot hear. if you cannot hear it than why it must be there to increase file size without hearable benefit?

to:
Dev0
First i made tests with wider range 112 - 320, but while i was monitoring the kbps i saw that only once kbps fall to 192, on one single file only, and on all the other files the kpbs NEVER fall under 224. this is the reason to repeat the tests with 192 as lowest value. usually i use 112 - 320 as range.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DigitalDictator on 2006-07-29 11:10:43
Quote
it was ABX test belive me. it was quite a test. 
when i made the tests, i was listening to the files lot of times each, on various of players and speakers. i even made different combinations with different players and different speakers.
That doesn't sound like an ABX to me. More like comparison.

Edit: typo
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DJDiabolik on 2006-07-29 11:22:49
actually Digital, i couldn't find the word, that why i wrote abx. my bad. You are right i compared them to see the quality loss and file size. it was quite a comparison. different players, different speakers and on each player i tested all speakers, so i can eliminate the differencies of players and speakers.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Never_Again on 2006-08-17 22:39:28
DJDiabolik wrote
>it was ABX test belive me. it was quite a test.

Without the ABX logs and links to the samples it sounds more like quite a bunch of BS.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: psycho on 2006-08-21 13:39:58
A new version of LAME has been released. 3.97b3... is this the new recommended version?

EDIT: I actually wanted to post to this (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=203) thread...
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DigitalDictator on 2006-08-21 21:42:17
Quote
A new version of LAME has been released. 3.97b3...
 

3.97b3? Are you sure? Where did you find that one?

Edit: quote problems:-)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: psycho on 2006-08-21 22:06:07
On sourceforge.net, offcourse... 

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=290 (http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=290)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DARcode on 2006-08-21 22:06:29
psycho's right:

http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.p...lease_id=440772 (http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=290&package_id=309&release_id=440772)

Changes: Just a small fix over beta2 regarding a potential problem with some specific signals (like trumpet)

john33 :-] ?

EDIT: Paging john33 ;-]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2006-08-22 05:35:45
Cool, so now it's up to beta 3 status.  Maybe sometime this decade, ver. 3.97 will become an official release (i.e. lose the "beta").

I'll probably wait at least a month or so before upgrading.  Or better yet, wait until Hydrogenaudio officially recommends 3.97b3 over 3.97b2.

Thanks for the heads-up, psycho.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: 2Bdecided on 2006-08-25 12:55:46
Can I bring up a very old issue.

The recommended settings page makes a very bold claim...

Quote
Target is always highest possible quality under given circumstances like target bitrate range or usage.

So we only deal with the famous MP3-Encoder LAME, because LAME offers best quality of all MP3-Encoders, even better than eg. the Fraunhofer MP3-Encoder.


I needed to demonstrate the quality of mp3 @ 96kbps last week.

I grabbed the edit of various material which I used years back for demonstrating ReplayGain. I edited it down to 1 minute, and resampled to 32kHz in Cool Edit Pro.

I encoded it using Lame 3.97b2 @ 96kbps CBR. It didn't sound very good (shock!). I tried a low pass filter @ 14.5kHz - it helped a bit.

I dug out an old FhG mp3 encoder for Cool Edit, and tried that. It sounded better. (ABX 8/8, though it wasn't really worth it at 96kbps!). I used the FhG file to demonstrate what mp3 could do at 96kbps.

I can upload the files, but I don't think the content matters that much. It's the bitrate, and using CBR. (IIRC FhG has the advantage of using intensity stereo, while lame doesn't?).


Just a small point. It makes us sound rather arrogant (and possibly incorrect, judging from what I found) to claim that Lame is better for everything always.

YMMV. I'd encourage someone else to try it. I'm sure there are plenty of releases of FhG's FastEnc out there to play with!

Cheers,
David.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DARcode on 2006-08-25 14:13:44
Very good point: about two 1.5 years ago I was converting FLAC's (decompressing and recompressing, not transcoding) to LAME 3.90.3 --alt-preset cbr 96 for my Nokia mobile (a 6230 if I remember correctly) and on (quite) a few occasions files produced with MusicMatch Jukebox sounded slightly better (mainly alternative and metal), switched to EAC, WavPack and HE-AAC now, don't have those files anymore and can't therefore provide any ABX info, sorry.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Gabriel on 2006-08-25 14:21:29
Lame does not have any specific code to deal with low bitrates. So on 'mid low" (70-100kbps) it can sometimes sound good, but it is likely to fail on some samples. At very low bitrates, it will fail badly in most cases.
FhG encoders have some specific handling for low bitrates.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: DARcode on 2006-08-25 14:31:00
Lame does not have any specific code to deal with low bitrates. So on 'mid low" (70-100kbps) it can sometimes sound good, but it is likely to fail on some samples. At very low bitrates, it will fail badly in most cases.
FhG encoders have some specific handling for low bitrates.
Yup, further proof of 2Bdecided's point's correctness.
Not a knock on LAME to any extent anyway: my (decently trained ears) simply love --preset fast extreme :]] !
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2006-08-25 17:05:52
Very good point: about two 1.5 years ago I was converting FLAC's (decompressing and recompressing, not transcoding) to LAME 3.90.3 --alt-preset cbr 96 for my Nokia mobile (a 6230 if I remember correctly) and on (quite) a few occasions files produced with MusicMatch Jukebox sounded slightly better (mainly alternative and metal), switched to EAC, WavPack and HE-AAC now, don't have those files anymore and can't therefore provide any ABX info, sorry.

I'm going slightly off topic here.  When you said "about two 1.5 years ago", is that a fancy way of saying "about 3 years ago"? 

Getting back on topic, I haven't tried experimenting with lower bitrate songs.  I guess the conclusion is to use a LAME alternative MP3 encoder for those audio sources.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: pepoluan on 2006-08-26 19:11:15
Cool, so now it's up to beta 3 status.  Maybe sometime this decade, ver. 3.97 will become an official release (i.e. lose the "beta").

I'll probably wait at least a month or so before upgrading.  Or better yet, wait until Hydrogenaudio officially recommends 3.97b3 over 3.97b2.

Thanks for the heads-up, psycho.

Yeah. Nice to see free softwares leaving out those "beta"s

Like for instance, Aoyumi recently produced "aoTuV Release 1". Granted, it is identical to "beta 4.51", with the sole difference being the vendor tag. But it's an improvement anyways

Hopefully with 3.98alpha will somehow graduates to 4.0RC ... or even full-fledged 4.0
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Sebastian Mares on 2006-08-26 19:26:08
4.0 is already being worked on.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Lyx on 2006-08-26 19:48:52
4.0 if i remember correctly is a completely different encoder. It's a different branch with mostly rewritten code all over the place. Thus, it has nothing to do with 3.9x.

- Lyx
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: beowulf7 on 2006-08-26 20:43:18
So 4.x will eventually be superior to 3.x?

For now, I'm just waiting for Hydrogenaudio to give the thumbs up to 3.97b3.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: 2Bdecided on 2006-08-29 12:35:17
Lame does not have any specific code to deal with low bitrates. So on 'mid low" (70-100kbps) it can sometimes sound good, but it is likely to fail on some samples. At very low bitrates, it will fail badly in most cases.
FhG encoders have some specific handling for low bitrates.


This is an honest (and definitive, "from the horse's mouth") answer.

Can someone with access update the "recommended settings" thread please?

Cheers,
David.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Alex B on 2006-08-29 14:13:33
Lame does not have any specific code to deal with low bitrates. So on 'mid low" (70-100kbps) it can sometimes sound good, but it is likely to fail on some samples. At very low bitrates, it will fail badly in most cases.
FhG encoders have some specific handling for low bitrates.
Guruboolez tried a lot of samples with various MP3 encoders at ~96 kbps here:
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoS...jet-84950-1.htm (http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm)

LAME was clearly the best MP3 encoder and he chose it to be used in the test.


Personally, I have tested WMP10 FhG "CBR 48 kbps", Helix "CBR 48 kbps" and LAME "--preset 48" with a few samples. On average all were equally bad. Only this sample that has extreme stereo separation showed LAME to be clearly worse than the two others:

Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: twist&shout mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\48kbps\09\MP3Helix - 09 - twist_shout.wav
2L = E:\test\48kbps\MP3FhG - 09 - twist_shout.wav
3R = E:\test\\48kbps\MP3Lame - 09 - twist_shout.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments: no 3 is clearly the worst. The other two are just very bad.
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\ogg\Test\09\MP3Helix - 09 - twist_shout.wav
1R Rating: 1.5
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2L File: E:\test\ogg\Test\09\MP3FhG - 09 - twist_shout.wav
2L Rating: 1.5
2L Comment:
---------------------------------------
3R File: E:\test\ogg\Test\09\MP3Lame - 09 - twist_shout.wav
3R Rating: 1.0
3R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:

The used settings were these:

FhG (WMP10): "default 48 kbps CBR"
Helix MP3 (the latest binary from Rarewares): "default 48 kbps CBR" (If I recall correctly I couldn't make Helix to encode 48 kbps VBR)
LAME 3.97b2: --preset 48

The tested samples are from Gabriel's recent 48 kbps test.


The five other samples that I tried didn't show as clear differences:

Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: chanchanT mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\01\MP3Lame - 01 - chanchanT.wav
2R = E:\test\01\MP3FhG - 01 - chanchanT.wav
3L = E:\test\01\MP3Helix - 01 - chanchanT.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\01\MP3Lame - 01 - chanchanT.wav
1R Rating: 1.4
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: E:\test\01\MP3FhG - 01 - chanchanT.wav
2R Rating: 1.6
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------
3L File: E:\test\01\MP3Helix - 01 - chanchanT.wav
3L Rating: 1.2
3L Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:
Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: fools mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\02\MP3Helix - 02 - fools.wav
2R = E:\test\02\MP3Lame - 02 - fools.wav
3R = E:\test\02\MP3FhG - 02 - fools.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments: 1 is a bit better with the "breaking glass sound"

1 and 2 are better with voice.

3 is worst

all are bad.
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\02\MP3Helix - 02 - fools.wav
1R Rating: 1.3
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: E:\test\02\MP3Lame - 02 - fools.wav
2R Rating: 1.2
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------
3R File: E:\test\02\MP3FhG - 02 - fools.wav
3R Rating: 1.1
3R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:
Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: kraftwerk mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\03\MP3Helix - 03 - kraftwerk.wav
2R = E:\test\03\MP3Lame - 03 - kraftwerk.wav
3R = E:\test\03\MP3FhG - 03 - kraftwerk.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\03\MP3Helix - 03 - kraftwerk.wav
1R Rating: 1.4
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: E:\test\03\MP3Lame - 03 - kraftwerk.wav
2R Rating: 1.3
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------
3R File: E:\test\03\MP3FhG - 03 - kraftwerk.wav
3R Rating: 1.2
3R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:
Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: sandman mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\06\MP3Helix - 06 - sandman.wav
2R = E:\test\06\MP3FhG - 06 - sandman.wav
3R = E:\test\06\MP3Lame - 06 - sandman.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\06\MP3Helix - 06 - sandman.wav
1R Rating: 1.1
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: E:\test\06\MP3FhG - 06 - sandman.wav
2R Rating: 1.2
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------
3R File: E:\test\06\MP3Lame - 06 - sandman.wav
3R Rating: 1.0
3R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:
Code: [Select]
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.5b, 07 june 2006
Testname: Stravinsky_Capriccio mp3

Tester: Alex B

1R = E:\test\07\MP3Lame - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav
2R = E:\test\07\MP3Helix - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav
3R = E:\test\07\MP3FhG - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: E:\test\07\MP3Lame - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav
1R Rating: 1.1
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: E:\test\07\MP3Helix - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav
2R Rating: 1.1
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------
3R File: E:\test\07\MP3FhG - 07 - Stravinsky_Capriccio.wav
3R Rating: 1.1
3R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:

I tested these because a web site needed to publish some audio files at about 48 kbps MP3. We ended up using LAME ABR in mono mode because the stereo files were simply too bad.


[!--sizeo:1--][span style=\"font-size:8pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--]Edit: typo[/size]
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: 2Bdecided on 2006-08-29 15:21:09
Guruboolez tried a lot of samples with various MP3 encoders at ~96 kbps here:
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoS...jet-84950-1.htm (http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm)

LAME was clearly the best MP3 encoder and he chose it to be used in the test.


The FhG codec was tested in CBR mode, but lame was tested in ABR mode.

It is an interesting test though. I don't think guru translated it for publication on HA, but it makes enough sense in the original French even if you don't speak it!

Your ABX results are interesting because some of the tracks where I heard the biggest difference were nearly mono.

This is probably a difficult topic to generate interest in here on HA, because none of us are encoding at 96kbps CBR!

Cheers,
David.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: guruboolez on 2006-08-29 19:42:56
The FhG codec was tested in CBR mode, but lame was tested in ABR mode.

Not exactly. Two Fraunhofer encoders were tested (WMP and Adobe Audition's one). WMP was set to CBR 96 whereas Audition allowed VBR encodings.
I used two different settings for Fhg VBR (-q20 & -q30) because average bitrate isn't the same with "classical" music and "various" music.

It may be interesting to note that all VBR encodings were finally coded in stereo (and not "joint stereo"): it's likely to be a bug, because I explicitely check the option "joint stereo" in the GUI. I discovered it much later. In other words, Fhg VBR with a proper stereo coding mode may sound better than what I tested last year (and can therefore be closer to LAME or simply better than it).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: 2Bdecided on 2006-08-30 10:43:17
Thanks guru,

I saw that bit, but haven't been keeping track with FhG codecs to know which one ships with Audition now.

The last one I have still has the "bad" HQ mode, but the "good" FastEnc. I assumed the WMP 96kbps CBR was nearly equivalent to "FastEnc", but could be wrong.


Interesting that they messed up joint stereo with VBR. At that bitrate, you'd think even intensity stereo would be an option.

Cheers,
David.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: ZinCh on 2006-09-28 11:43:02
please confirm - there is NO ANY DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY between --vbr-new and non vbr-new settings:
lame -V 2 file.wav file.mp3
lame -V 2 --vbr-new file.wav file.mp3
produce same quality, but on different speed?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: iGold on 2006-09-28 11:48:34
"In terms of quality, --vbr-new appears to be better than the old model ... --vbr-new is currently recommended over the default VBR mode due to both the speed and quality increases afforded by the new algorithm."
See wiki (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME#Remarks).

Edit: formatting.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: underboss7000 on 2006-10-02 07:59:06
Quote
3.97beta -> Latest LAME version. Recommended at last! Check List of Recommended LAME settings.


Would someone please modify the quoted sentence to somehing "like 3.97 final-> .... " as 97 has gone final?

[NOTE: This is from the thread " Lame versions and alphas - READ THIS!" - the Pinned Thread
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Bodhi on 2006-10-02 20:07:49
What about something like:

VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs.
A few examples:
V5 seems to be appropriate on portable devices used in a nomadic way.
V4 seems to be appropriate is you pay a moderate/medium attention to the music.
V2 will likely be transparent to standard people.
V0 will give you the highest VBR quality, but is a bit extreme regarding bitrate/file size.


For V2 I would say:
V2 will likely be transparent to standard people with not standard equipment
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-03 22:36:46
Is there anywhere a short summary why these are recommended LAME settings?
Actually, there are several recommended settings.
I opted for this one:
-V 0 --vbr-new --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d
While there is a lot of explanation and description of quality settings, I don't see explanation why e.g. --pad-id3v2 parameter is recommended, or why other parameters
--ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d
are included and some others are not (like --tg for genre).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Martin H on 2007-03-03 23:45:46
The lame.exe "--pad-id3v2" switch is recommended because it avoids the whole file needing to be re-written during tag-updates later on(unless the update adds more than 128 bytes to the ID3v2 tag). The lame.exe tagging switches are recommended instead of EAC's own tagging implementation because some people have reported problems with EAC's tagging implementation. The lame.exe "--tg" switch isn't recommended because if the genre isn't one of 148 genres that lame.exe supports, then those files won't be encoded to MP3 and lame.exe shows an error message. I would personally recommend to use the "--tg" switch in addition to the "--ignore-tag-errors" switch, which will make lame.exe still encode files with un-supported genres and just set the genre tag to "Other".
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-04 00:38:40
The lame.exe "--tg" switch isn't recommended because if the genre isn't one of 148 genres that lame.exe supports, then those files won't be encoded to MP3 and lame.exe shows an error message. I would personally recommend to use the "--tg" switch in addition to the "--ignore-tag-errors" switch, which will make lame.exe still encode files with un-supported genres and just set the genre tag to "Other".

Hmmm,
I planned to use some unsuported genres. Does that mean that if I put in EAC as a genre e.g. "HR Rock" that it will actually be converted into "Other" by Lame?
Is there any way to use custom genres in mp3 tags?
I know that for flac tags, genres are not predefined, I just need to figure out how to put them there.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Martin H on 2007-03-04 00:49:44
Does that mean that if I put in EAC as a genre e.g. "HR Rock" that it will actually be converted into "Other" by Lame?

Yes, if you use lame.exe's "--ignore-tag-errors" switch. If you don't, then the file(s) will not even be encoded and an error message displayed in the console.
Quote
Is there any way to use custom genres in mp3 tags?

Yes, but not with lame.exe's ID3v2 implementation. You can either use EAC's own tagging implementation which does support custom genres, or you could use the REACT (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=50273) EAC plugin, which uses metamp3.exe (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=49751) for MP3 tagging and which does support custom genres.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-04 01:13:37

Does that mean that if I put in EAC as a genre e.g. "HR Rock" that it will actually be converted into "Other" by Lame?

Yes, if you use lame.exe's "--ignore-tag-errors" switch. If you don't, then the file(s) will not even be encoded and an error message displayed in the console.

It seems that there's no point doing that. Why specifying custom genre, when it will be tagged as Other.
I can then specify it as Other in the first place.
Quote

Is there any way to use custom genres in mp3 tags?

Yes, but not with lame.exe's ID3v2 implementation. You can either use EAC's own tagging implementation which does support custom genres, or you could use the REACT (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=50273) EAC plugin, which uses metamp3.exe (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=49751) for MP3 tagging and which does support custom genres.

How do I use EAC's tagging implementation? Does that mean that I cannot use Lame as an external encoder in that case?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Martin H on 2007-03-04 03:16:08
No, you can still use lame.exe for encoding. Just remove the lame.exe tagging switches from your command-line and then enable "Add ID3 tag" under "Compression Options > External Compression". You can adjust the ID3 settings under "Compression Options > ID3 Tag".

Please read an EAC guide to get to learn the different settings of EAC.

SatCP's EAC Quickstart Manual :
http://users.pandora.be/satcp/eac-qs-en.htm#quickstart (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/eac-qs-en.htm#quickstart)
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: mjpartyboy on 2007-03-04 12:41:36
When using a command line does it matter if there is a space or not between the -V and the number because on the Wiki's LAME page it references it both ways, e.g. -V4 --vbr-new and -V 4 --vbr-new?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-04 21:22:40
No, you can still use lame.exe for encoding. Just remove the lame.exe tagging switches from your command-line and then enable "Add ID3 tag" under "Compression Options > External Compression". You can adjust the ID3 settings under "Compression Options > ID3 Tag".

Please read an EAC guide to get to learn the different settings of EAC.

SatCP's EAC Quickstart Manual :
http://users.pandora.be/satcp/eac-qs-en.htm#quickstart (http://users.pandora.be/satcp/eac-qs-en.htm#quickstart)


Thanks,
but I'm using flacattack to convert to both flac and mp3, so it's a bit more complicated. I'm still trying to figure out how parameters are passed between EAC->flacattack->lame and EAC->flacattack->flac.
Any instructions/explanation about that?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Martin H on 2007-03-05 00:39:30
I have no experience with Flacattack, but i have just checked and it uses lame.exe for tagging, so you're out of luck with that, i'm affraid.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: jerry on 2007-03-06 02:11:25
Hi
Can any1 explain whats EAC command line option, 
%l--alt-preset 128%l  %h--alt-preset standard%h  %s%d
Bit rate 192
High quality
Its totally different from the recomended settings
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: UrbanVoyeur on 2007-03-06 04:40:44
Can any1 explain whats EAC command line option, 
%l--alt-preset 128%l  %h--alt-preset standard%h  %s%d
Bit rate 192
High quality
Its totally different from the recommended settings


EAC allows you to toggle between two encoding settings for an external compressor: Low and High.

The settings between %l %l are the "low" and the %h %h the "high".  They can be any two settings you choose. The radio buttons let you choose which settings will be passed to the LAME encoder.

--alt preset 128 and --alt preset standard are outdated LAME parameters.
--alt preset 128 = Average Bit Rate (ABR) of 128 = --abr 128  (in 3.95+)
--alt preset standard = generally accepted as transparent (equal to CD) = -V3  (in 3.95+)

See HA LAME Wiki, the top of this thread, or the quick start cited earlier in this thread for the current equivalents. There are a whole host of variations you can use.
Mine is: %l-V3 --vbr-new%l%h-V0 -q0 -b32 --vbr-new%h %s %d
Low Setting: -V3 --vbr-new
High Setting: -V0 -q0 -b32 --vbr-new

Note: I do not recommend using my settings, I just place them here as an example.

With these, and most other command line options in the external compressor screen,  the bit rate pull down is ignored.

%s and %d are EAC variables for the "source" (wav) and "destination" (mp3) paths of the encoded file. They complete the LAME command line.

All of this can be confusing, since different sources each have their own set of recommended and best settings, some more current than others.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-06 16:33:12
The lame.exe "--pad-id3v2" switch is recommended because it avoids the whole file needing to be re-written during tag-updates later on(unless the update adds more than 128 bytes to the ID3v2 tag). The lame.exe tagging switches are recommended instead of EAC's own tagging implementation because some people have reported problems with EAC's tagging implementation. The lame.exe "--tg" switch isn't recommended because if the genre isn't one of 148 genres that lame.exe supports, then those files won't be encoded to MP3 and lame.exe shows an error message. I would personally recommend to use the "--tg" switch in addition to the "--ignore-tag-errors" switch, which will make lame.exe still encode files with un-supported genres and just set the genre tag to "Other".


I found a list of Lame supported  genres (http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/*checkout*/lame/lame/doc/html/id3.html),
but number 42 is missing.
Do you know what is it?
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Nik on 2007-03-06 17:24:29
I found a list of Lame supported  genres (http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/*checkout*/lame/lame/doc/html/id3.html),
but number 42 is missing.
Do you know what is it?

I found it. It's 42 - Soul
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Martin H on 2007-03-06 17:31:05
It's : Soul

I have just tested it out and lame.exe does support the "Soul" genre also, so it is just a mistake in the LAME documentation.

Edit: Not fast enough
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: lucasg51 on 2009-05-14 01:16:19
HI GUYS
Great threat, old though haha.

Until now I was encoding with nero, at 128 kbps.
But that's not good enough, so I checked LAME.

Everyone say that using -V2 its good enough. -V2 it's between 170 kbps and 210 kbps.
I want stereo, NOT Joint stereo. And the ability to encode FLAC to LAME.
I run some tests using LameXp.

With Quality 2 (V2) in Winamp says 271 kbps (VBR). Isn't it supposed to be between 170 and 210? 271 is way up.

So I tried restricting the bitrate. I want 192 VBR, so I used 2 above and 2 bellow. I mean, encode between min: 160 and max: 224 kbps. This got a song with 223kbps (VBR). In the range.

Am I doing something wrong? I think the quality bar in LameXP is wrong.
What do you think about encoding between 160 and 224?

best luck, LUCAS
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kornchild2002 on 2009-05-14 05:24:37
You need to go back and read through this thread.  You also need to search the forums and read through the documentation located here (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lame) at the Lame wiki page.  In short, joint stereo is a lossless process that actually allows the encoder to perform better.  Many other lossy codecs (I believe Nero AAC and even lossless FLAC) use processes similar to this (or maybe even the same procedure, I am not an expert).  Additionally, you don't want to restrict Lame when it comes to bitrates.  Pick a proper -V value and go with it.  -V 2 is often recommended but many people now feel that -V 3 is a better choice it results in overall lower bitrates while having transparent (ie "CD quality") results.

The best thing that you can do is download foobar2000 and conduct some blind ABX tests to determine what bitrate setting is right for you.  A blind ABX test will force you to ignore the bitrates of the files and hear the quality.  That is what you really want to do.  There is nothing out there that states files encoded between 160 and 224 kbps have the best quality (any place/person that actually says this should be ignored as everyone's preferred quality setting is a little different).  foobar2000 can also convert your FLAC track to mp3 files using Lame while preserving the track tag information.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: lucasg51 on 2009-05-14 19:45:33
KORNCHILD

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 you said I'll conduct some ABX blind tests.
I knew about the lame information here. There's a list that says that lame -V2 is between 170 and 210 kbps, but I ended up with a 270 kbps song.
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?

Changing the subject, but still with mp3.
FLAC to LAME V4 is the same as FLAC to LAME V2 to LAME V4 ?
LAME 320 CBR to 192 CBR is the same as LAME 320 CBR to LAME 256 CBR to LAME 192 CBR ?

Thanks, LUCAS
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: twostar on 2009-05-14 19:53:28
If you're encoding rock or metal, you're bitrates will most likely be higher. See this (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=67523&view=findpost&p=601101).
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: Slipstreem on 2009-05-14 20:13:02
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. 
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: kornchild2002 on 2009-05-14 21:15:58
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.
Title: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings
Post by: greynol on 2009-05-15 04:55:19
Talking about transcoding is NOT on-topic.

Because this topic is centered around an older version of Lame I'm closing this discussion.