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: Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97? (Read 4447 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

I ripped The Prodigy - Invaders Must Die in v0 with both versions and every song was bigger by about (.5MB-1MB), the bitrates were also higher in 3.98.

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #1 –
Did you mean to answer your own question? 

terry

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #2 –
why does 3.98 choose to use a higher bitrate and extra space? so all of my 3.97 mp3s are inferior?

Moderation: Please don't quote the previous post in full, or quote the previous post at all if it isn't necessary.

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #3 –
You can use mp3packer to decrease size of files encoded by lame 3.98. For -V0 the difference is ~10 kbps.

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #4 –
With LAME you can use fractional -V values, so you can readjust 3.98 to give similar bitrates to what you were getting with 3.97. This will probably also make the quality similar.

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: CodsterTX on
why does 3.98 choose to use a higher bitrate and extra space? so all of my 3.97 mp3s are inferior?
No. If you considered your 3.97 rips transparent and the same for your 3.98 rips, there's nothing to worry about.

Moderation: Removed unnecessary quote.
EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.99 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP12 2)MAC-Extra High

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #6 –
the OP's main question - why the bitrate difference between Lame 3.97 and 3.98 - is still unanswered in this thread.
I've seen other threads about this but don't know about any consensus. I've seen some stuff where 3.98 has a lower bitrate than 3.97, but mostly higher.
I'm curious if someone knows and can explain more the changes.
God kills a kitten every time you encode with CBR 320
 

Why are LAME 3.98 filesizes bigger than 3.97?

Reply #7 –
The machinery has changed quite a bit, and it was in favor of improving worst case behavior.
With a changing machinery it's plausible that bitrate behavior is a bit different, and when struggling for more homogenous results satisfying the user chosen quality it's plausible that there's a tendency for bitrate to go up.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17