HydrogenAudio

Lossy Audio Compression => MP3 => MP3 - Tech => Topic started by: Brad15146 on 2004-03-14 15:48:27

Title: VBR question
Post by: Brad15146 on 2004-03-14 15:48:27
I have a question about VBR. I just downloaded 'The Very Best of the Doors' (released in 2001) and The Doors first album 'The Doors' (re-released around 1999). Both of these albums have the SAME remastering and the SAME volume levels. However, one album has a higher average VBR rate than the other. Does a higher VBR rate indicate better quality? Both these albums are APS.
Title: VBR question
Post by: tigre on 2004-03-14 16:08:01
There are several possibilities:

- remastering + volume level is not the same (maybe there are different versions in different countries
- A different version/compile of lame has been used
- One version (or both) is not (pure) --alt-preset standard but some other commandline has been used or something has been added like -Y, -m s, -k.
- One version (or both) is transcoded from lossy
- Some DSP has been applied before encoding, e.g. normalization/replaygain.

"Higher bitrate = better" can be wrong. Better check both files with encspot (lame version, stereo mode, vbr mode, psy model, lowpass, "unwise settings" etc.) and maybe additionally with a wave editor (spectral view, compare volume).
Title: VBR question
Post by: chrisgeleven on 2004-03-14 16:23:28
Albums released in different years do NOT mean they have the same remastering.

Different techniques can be used, different volume levels can be used, etc.

I have seen differences (at the extreme) of nearly 50kbps between the same song on different albums.
Title: VBR question
Post by: odious malefactor on 2004-03-14 17:17:19
Quote
Both of these albums have the SAME remastering and the SAME volume levels.

However, the content is different. Why would you expect albums with different content to have the same average bitrate?
Title: VBR question
Post by: Brad15146 on 2004-03-14 21:01:39
Quote
Quote
Both of these albums have the SAME remastering and the SAME volume levels.

However, the content is different. Why would you expect albums with different content to have the same average bitrate?

Sorry, I should have clarified...I meant the songs that are the same on both albums. There are 5-6 songs that are the same on both yet have different bitrates but have the same remastering applied to them. From an audio standpoint, I can't tell any difference--same volume level etc. It's only when I go into the file info and see the difference in the VBR rates, which in most of the cases are larger than one would expect.
Title: VBR question
Post by: gazzyk1ns on 2004-03-14 23:13:54
Well I suppose the first thing to say is that you don't know that they are remastered to the same standard. Even if it says on the CD/booklet "remastered to X standard" then the standard might have changed or they might have used different techniques to meet that loosely defined standard. The standard might aslo have changed over time.

I suppose a more likely explaination is that although the songs are the same, the source "files" (whatever the studio people call their source tracks) could have been different, i.e. recorded at a different time and/or with different equipment (or just a different 'mix' of the different tracks from the same recording session).
Title: VBR question
Post by: Hanky on 2004-03-14 23:27:46
Quote
... I just downloaded 'The Very Best of the Doors' (released in 2001)....

You downloaded only the encoded files? You won't be able to check the encoder used and the command line settings used to encode both albums, they could be totally different. In the early days of HA, the only correct answer to this type of questions would be: Re-encode from the originals with your favourite settings 
Title: VBR question
Post by: Single on 2004-03-15 18:30:58
Quote
levels. However, one album has a higher average VBR rate than the other. Does a higher VBR rate indicate better quality? Both these albums are APS.

Hi!

Try to look in to files and serach lame string or try mp3guessenc. Maybe it is a different versions of lame.