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: [Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings (Read 306896 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #150 –
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.  My suggestion would be the HA wiki.
I'm on a horse.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #151 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #152 –
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 encoding, etc.[/span]

For very low bitrates, up to 100kbps, 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 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.

[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 encoding.  Audible differences between these 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 MP3, with the lowest risk of artifacts.
With the exception of a few situations, quality is rarely better than the highest VBR profiles described above. There is a reason that --cbr 320 is called "insane".  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 MP3, with the lowest risk of artifacts.
With the exception of a few situations, quality is rarely better than the highest VBR profiles 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 encoding.
Audible differences between these presets exist, but are extremely marginal.

Portable : background noise and low 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.

Very Low Bitrate : voice, radio or mono encoding

For very low bitrates, up to 100kbps, ABR is most often the best solution.
Use --abr xx (e.g. --abr 80).
I'm on a horse.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #153 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #154 –
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

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #155 –
Quote
[span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%']Portable[/span][span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'] : background noise and low 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.
Every night with my star friends / We eat caviar and drink champagne
Sniffing in the VIP area / We talk about Frank Sinatra
Do you know Frank Sinatra? / He's dead

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #156 –
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"...
I'm on a horse.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #157 –
Quote
Something like "minimal file size requirement" - maybe "optimum file size"... maybe "minimal KB requirement"...

How about "low storage space requirement" ?

Regards,
Madrigal

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #158 –
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.
My used codecs and settings:
FLAC V1.1.2 -4 / APE V3.99 Update 4 -high / MPC V1.15v --q 5 / LAME V3.97b2 -V2 --vbr-new / OGG aoTuV V4.51 Lancer -q5

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #159 –
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. 
Every night with my star friends / We eat caviar and drink champagne
Sniffing in the VIP area / We talk about Frank Sinatra
Do you know Frank Sinatra? / He's dead

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #160 –
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)?

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #161 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #162 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #163 –
• My tests
• Bug80

There are maybe other tests, but I don't remember them.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #164 –
Thank you, guruboolez!

I knew there'd be one by you.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #165 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #166 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #167 –
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.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #168 –
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.
Blubb

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #169 –
LAME sure has a lot of switches.....  Just an observation.  No opinions implied.

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #170 –
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?
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #171 –
why was razorlame replaced with all2lame?

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #172 –
I'm not sure, but razorlame was choking on Replaygain messages from newer versions of LAME. Maybe that was why.

edit: grammar

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #173 –
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!

[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #174 –
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.