Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: "--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ? (Read 5910 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Hi I'm a bit confused about the difference (if any) between --alt-presets and plain --presets. I'm currently using 3.96, are these options exactly the same thing or is there a difference?


The reason I ask is that just downloaded a cli plugin (generic command line interface) for foobar 2000 and it only gives me these "--alt-preset" options.

Previously I was using "--preset medium" (or -V 4) from the command line so now with this foorbar cli plugin I'm using "--alt-preset medium" which I'm assuming should be exactly the same thing.

The only thing that's got me a bit unsure is that the filesize I'm getting from this foobar plugin (set to use command line lame with --alt-preset medium) is slightly smaller (only a couple of kB) than the filesize for the same track using the lame command line encoder using --preset medium ???

BTW, I was using the exact same 3.96 lame.exe in each case but the foobar plugin was trancoding from lossless ape (monkey audio) whereas the other command line encode was using cdex1.51 direct from the CD. However I just made that lossless ape file from the same CD, ripped by the same program (CDEX) and the CD is in perfect condition. Curerntly I'm guessing that it's just something different in the tagging or a very slight difference in the end of track silence or similar but just want to double check that --alt-preset and --preset are really the same thing.

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #1 –
In the newer LAME versions --preset and --alt-preset are exactly the same thing.
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #2 –
Quote
In the newer LAME versions --preset and --alt-preset are exactly the same thing.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Thanks, I thought they were but just wanted to be sure.

BTW. After I posted this question I took a wav file and encoded it both ways, command line "--preset medium" and the foobar cli plugin with "--alt-preset medium" (don't know why I didn't think to do that first up ). As expected the resultant mp3's were byte for byte identical. So the difference I prevoiusly noticed must have been nothing more than differences in tagging or something similar.

PS. I downloaded the foobar cli pluggin from [a href="http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/foobar2000.php]HERE[/url]. It works great and now solves my problem (in another thread) about which of the limited cdex presets to use when transcoding ape to mp3. I'm now happily doing this transcoding in foobar.

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #3 –
Quote
I'm now happily doing this transcoding in foobar.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262159"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

bad boy!
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #4 –
Quote
Quote
I'm now happily doing this transcoding in foobar.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262159"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

bad boy!
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262170"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


????. I'm not sure what you mean by that Jojo. Are you referring to transcoding being a big no no.

I'm transcoding from lossless so I dont think there would be any difference between this and re-ripping directly from the original CD. I currently have all my CD's ripped to lossless monkeys audio, (because I have plenty of HDD space and not that bigger music collection). When I need mp3's, for a portible device or whatever, then I transcode the ape's to mp3's as required.

I don't think there is any problem in doing this but I'm sure someone will let me know if there is.

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #5 –
Quote
I don't think there is any problem in doing this but I'm sure someone will let me know if there is.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262174"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You're fine with transcoding from lossless. Transcoding from lossy to lossy is what he was giving you the    about.

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #6 –
Quote
I don't think there is any problem in doing this...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262174"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

no there isn't any problem . However, transcoding sounds for me always like encoding from one lossy format to another one...if the source is lossless shouldn't it be called re-encoding instead? Not to confuse with re-ripping
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #7 –
Quote
if the source is lossless shouldn't it be called re-encoding instead?


I guess you could call it that if you wanted to reserve the use of the word "transcode" for only instances where it's evil.

Honestly though I think the name transcoding would rightly apply to any instance of converting from one encoded/compressed format to another, which ape to mp3 certainly is.
 

"--preset" versus "--alt-preset", same thing ?

Reply #8 –
Quote
In the newer LAME versions --preset and --alt-preset are exactly the same thing.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=262126"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank You. This helped me.