ENCODING? Releasing your encodes to the public? Please, for the good of the community, use one of the following two command lines. The first offers maximal portability. The quality achieved is still very high--noticeably better than simple-stereo files encoded at constant bitrates of 192 kbps. The second line leaves absolutely nothing to desire in the way of quality, for it squeezes every bit of juice out of LAME 3.9x while still retaining reasonable compression ratios. Both lines are quite speedy, especially #2.
LAMELINE
#1,
for superior portability:
-vbr-mtrh -h -V0 -mj -b96 -Y -Z Because file sizes are even lower than those produced by r3mix, encode times are comparable, and due to the reliance on the latest LAME series--3.9x--for improved efficiency, this line is being touted as the new r3mix (or "the r3mix killer that was" ). Audible quality corresponds to --alt-preset fast extreme.
LAMELINE
#2,
for superior quality:
-vbr-old -q1 -V0 -mj --lowpass 19.6 -b112Producing file sizes in line with those yielded by --alt-preset standard, this line amazingly manages to surpass --alt-preset extreme--even insane--in perceived sonic quality.
But
SIR, why not just use the alt presets??
In the seminar I delivered today, I was quoted as saying:
"While LAME's alt presets are good, there is better, mainly because of the psychoacoustical model utilized by these presets; it is an experimental mode that has just recently been proven to have very poor pre-echo control when long blocks are subject." For more on this, please refer to < http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showth...p?threadid=1196 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=1196) >, where JohnV concludes: "Despite Dibrom's --alt-preset insane tweaks, nspsytune's long-block "problem" still is there." Additionally, I went on to say: "-q1 is specially tuned for gpsycho, so where quality is #1, line #2 comes through." To add insult to injury, nssafejoint seems to be playing a key culprit in audible distortion in a fair number of samples encoded with the alt presets; just ask "Wombat" (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showth...hp?threadid=874 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=874)).
JOINT STEREO is utilized by both lines for reasons I am sure most HA forum-goers are aware of. There is no excuse not use VBR so it is thusly activated. If your player does not support VBR, return it, for VBR is part of the orignal MPEG [Audio] Layer 3 specs.
Try 'em out on your personal music collections. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised .
And remember, SAY NO to simple-stereo-192 albums encoded by the "ripping groups"! Just because this was the way to go four years ago doesn't mean it speaks accurately for smart, efficient, high-fidelity mp3-encoding today (and it DOESN'T!).--
Some amending humor I came across while performing a mini presentation [on the superb Lamelines above]:
<Annachie> vbr rips are crap
<Annachie> and lame is a crappy encoder
<Annachie> codec
<Annachie> you better check http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/bestsound.html (http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/bestsound.html)
<Annachie> read about vbr and why radium codec is used by the "pros"
I asked exactly which pros he was referring to, and stated that MP3 is not used professionally:<Annachie> some decent ripping groups
<Annachie> like eNt or JUST
<Annachie> and by no means should u use joint stereo
<Annachie> they dont have to reripp anything cuz they are certain about their releases being good
<Annachie> lame rips are always glitchy, and the bass goes high as hell
I added that FhG has long since abadoned MP3 while LAME is being continually improved to this day:<Annachie> yet it hasnt matched radiums quality
<Annachie> so, keep on updating it
<SpinDoctr> lame needs to be continiously improved so it can catch radium one day
<SpinDoctr> it says lame iz lame
(In regard to the page posted by Annachie.)<Annachie> 160 kbps should be in Joint Stereo/MS Audio, 192 kbps should be in Stereo
--
[span style='font-size:9']Remember, we're all in this together! With this edit I surrender.[/span]
Quality corresponds to --alt-preset fast extreme... Producing file sizes inline with those yielded by --alt-preset standard, this line amazingly manages to surpass --alt-preset extreme--even insane--in perceived sonic quality.
Please refer us to the results of an objective test you've carried out which confirms these statements.
lol!
The samples where pre echo is a bit worse don´t justify
the absense of nspsytune.
There would be "much" more problem samples without nspsy.
When you are talking about me, what i said, read carefully.
The thread i offer the distorted samples says that is only
an isue with noise shaping. I first thought it is nssafejoint
in the end it is clear -Z beeing used with liebestod solves
the problems and sophia and birds get much better
a short test showed that no song is better with your settings
against aps -Z
And these are only samples that are "very rare" with aps,
your commandline hasn´t much potential against the alt presets!
Lameline #1 must be a joke to compete aps at ~192 kbit, isn´t it?
Believe me
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showth...hp?threadid=874 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=874)
Wombat
i can see the bloodbath now...
a few questions though, before you live no more...
...where are you to be giving a seminar on lame commandlines?
...who quotes themselves in their own posts?
later
mike
Well to end this discussion from my point of view.
Lameline #2 has all faults we tried to tune for a while now.
Dropouts will occur like "Serious Trouble" (btw, i rarely had
heard this that badly encoded as with Lameline #1)
Block switching isn´t as efficient anymore (dibroms Tunings),
fatboy, drone...
With metal bitrates bloat.
To this list surely can be added much more stuff, but this is
enough i think.
Wombat
ffc?
Or maybe Beatles?
LOL...
This looks like a troll post to me, except it's so long... most trolling authors wouldn't spend this much time typing a post purely to start an argument.
Congratulations, Hydrogenaudio has reached critical mass
mmh....
Edit after Edit!!??
J?
Instead of responding to this lengthy post quote by quote, I'll just ask for specific samples where the supposed command line given is superior to --alt-preset standard.
Also, as stated by others before me here, it appears you have taken the statements of JohnV and Wombat completely out of context. In addition, you are mistaken about the nssafejoint issue altogether.
It might surprise you to know that both of these very people were some of those who actually helped --alt-preset standard to become what it is. As Wombat has stated, although there might be those few problem samples mentioned in the particular post you linked to, the samples which are problematic without --alt-preset standard are far greater.
Both JohnV and Wombat (and many others with great ears) have in the past performed extensive listening tests with --alt-preset standard and I'm quite sure that they would both tell you that there are no other command line options or presets currently available in LAME which will give you better quality at the same bitrate.
Anyway.. I await some sort of proof of your claims.
lol, randar or should I say ffc..?
Last time on irc you wanted to use non existant switches.. I'm glad that now you have found at least switches that exist.
However, just for your info...anonymous proxies will be banned.
This guy has been banned from #project_mayhem, #vorbis and #r3mix irc-channels. I guess no need to explain more..
[edit] Except that "Lameline1" doesn't use vbr-mtrh. It uses vbr-old. Correct switch for vbr-mtrh would be --vbr-mtrh.
randar, ffc, or whoever you are, if you wish to continue posting to this site (if you are not already banned under another alias) you will have to use a regular isp connection and not come to the site through an anonymous web proxy.
Just where are these presentations and seminars given? I would surely love to attend!
lol determining used codecs by copyright etc flags, it's just too ridiculous
too sad that the last revision was in 2000
If people *must* use one of the other "free" codecs and encode below 192kbps, I sure wish they'd choose Xing instead of Blade. If it's a question of "bad" vs. "horrendous" there's no contest.
Originally posted by Benjamin Lebsanft
lol determining used codecs by copyright etc flags, it's just too ridiculous
Benni, that was one of the ideas Naoki used to create mp3guessenc. It's not ridiculous.
I few minutes ago, Randar contacted me on IRC asking me to post a reply from him. I won't post it here, because I believe this issue has gone a little too far, but I will make it available at my server:
http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/randar.txt (http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/randar.txt)
Also, I will not make any comments or post my opinions. But rest alerted that the contents here are similar to those of his earlier post.
Regards;
Roberto.
Edit: I believe I should make this clear: Not a word of what he wrote was edited.
Edit2: The original text from randar I uploaded had some errors (paragraphs truncated). A complete one is now available.
"In just the past few days I have literally converted thousands..." :rofl:
As a quick and dirty test, I tried castanets, one of the samples recommended for trial in ffc's -- oops, randar's off-forum post. I encoded using lame 3.91 aps and also randar's lameline 2 command line.
I used Ivan's waverate to have the original present as well when I listened to the samples. Then I performed 10 waverate tests (I could have performed a direct ABX comparison, but this was in response to randar's objection that the original should always be present). I rated ll2 worse than aps 9 out of 10 times (confidence = 99%).
Surprisingly, in chat, randar said he could not tell the difference when listening through speakers (although he says he has access to Orpheus headphones!) between the original castanets, apx, and ll2.
Then he said that the "differences so subtle and in such a short excerpt of such a small number number of clips aren't worth fussing about."
Hmm. ok.
ff123
Originally posted by rjamorim
Benni, that was one of the ideas Naoki used to create mp3guessenc. It's not ridiculous.
but you can set flags in every encoder. Just turn them on or off. In my opinion you can't say anything about the encoder because you don't know if the user changed them
Originally posted by Benjamin Lebsanft
but you can set flags in every encoder. Just turn them on or off. In my opinion you can't say anything about the encoder because you don't know if the user changed them
Yeah, but since MP3 doesn't feature any kind of header (except LAME and latest Gogo) like MPC, that says which encoder was used and, in the case of MPC, how, you must grab any kind of info you can get to try to determine the encoder. In this case, Naoki gets the default flags - Since most users just execute something like mp3enc -br 128 Music.wav, and never care about copyright or original flag, or whatever.
Regards;
Roberto.
OK, let's look at this one final time (I won't post on the topic after this).
Here's his claim:
"the lamelines just offer
improved efficiency, faster encode times, and better throughput."
OK first point. Improved efficiency, what's that? What kind of "efficiency" do these alternate command lines offer? They sure take longer to type in than "--alt-preset standard" (and are harder to memorize), so keyboard/brainpower efficiency is not one
Second, faster encode times. OK, that may be, but unless running a very slow processor or encoding hundreds of files at once, what's the difference? You only encode once, but you listen many times... and most front ends for lame allow for batch processing in the background while doing other things. This is a minimal issue for most people. And that doesn't even take into account that the ABR and CBR presets offer better quality than these standard command lines, and probably more speed too.
Third... better throughput. Again, what does that mean? Throughput?? That makes even less sense than "improved efficiency."
OK, I'm done feeding trolls and "personal command line fanatics." We now return to our regularly scheduled programming...
Heh. Why is anybody still using MP3?
I mean, aside from the obvious portable uses. MPC is much much better for quality rips, and there is an MPC-MP3 transcoding tool available for portable users.
randar, ffc, or whoever you are, if you wish to continue posting to this site (if you are not already banned under another alias) you will have to use a regular isp connection and not come to the site through an anonymous web proxy.
randar is ffc. But ffc is banned from posting to this forum, so we won't see either ffc or randar here again unless ffc adopts both another persona and a new ISP.
ff123
Originally posted by mpcfiend
Heh. Why is anybody still using MP3?
I mean, aside from the obvious portable uses. MPC is much much better for quality rips, and there is an MPC-MP3 transcoding tool available for portable users.
I would venture a guess -- for the same reasons people are still advocating weird Lame command lines, using the Blade encoder at 128kbps, calling 128k "cd quality," etc. A combination of lack of knowledge, entrenched behaviours, and laziness about investigating alternatives. The sort of combination that causes a sheep to remain with the flock at all costs.
BTW, transcoding sucks. With 80 gig hard drives going cheap, I don't know why anyone bothers risking sound quality instead of re-ripping.
:coding:
BTW, transcoding sucks. With 80 gig hard drives going cheap, I don't know why anyone bothers risking sound quality instead of re-ripping.
One word: convience. I'm my experience, transcoding MPC --insane to MP3 ~128kbps is great for casual listening on a portable.
Originally posted by rjamorim
I few minutes ago, Randar contacted me on IRC asking me to post a reply from him. I won't post it here, because I believe this issue has gone a little too far, but I will make it available at my server:
http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/randar.txt (http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/randar.txt)
Hmm, I don't know if it's such a good idea to feed the troll. Anyway, it would be ok, if randar/FFC had honest goals, but his goals seems to be just trolling and trying to waste time of other people.
He somehow got in to #project_mayhem and admitted me his "3 months testing" is just theoretical speculation and he just wants to see how "his lines" compare to APS.
Of course the top of the list consisted of the few known APS problem clips reported in mp3 technical/quality forum thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showth...s=&threadid=874 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=874)), using even the exact wordings. Except castanets, but I would also rate castanets better with APS than "Lameline 2". APS is better with the slow hits and in the end of the fast section.
His other clips starting from wzr-old.flac well, I guess those have to be tested against "Lameline 2". It's however weird that the explanations start to be very simplified.
"Lameline 1", may cause big problems because of gpsycho and noise-shaping type2 used together. randar/ffc probably didn't know that nspsytune defaults to ns-type 2 and using -Z switches it to ns-type 1. But gpsycho defaults to ns-type 1 and using -Z switches it to type 2. There's gonna be problems with gpsycho and ns-type 2...
Also just noticed that "Lameline 1" doesn't use vbr-mtrh at all. Correct switch would be --vbr-mtrh, not -vbr-mtrh. Now "Lameline 1" uses vbr-old.
This kind of trolling is not the correct method that should be used for improving things. Though I'm not sure randar/ffc's idea is to provide better commandlines, rather just cause confusion and waste time of others.
Fortunately Lame is so good, that there's not awful damage done even if people would use the "Lameline 2".
Hmm, seems that randar/ffc's clips are not available anymore. Wonder why..
I managed to download only 3 samples
do_harm.flac
dm-mph.flac
ae-vose.flac
Did anybody else got the other files?
LOL, randar/ffc has moved to r3mix-forum now.
http://66.96.216.160/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board...&num=1019461432 (http://66.96.216.160/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=c&action=display&num=1019461432)
"Lamelines" are in his sig, and of course now Lameline1 has been changed: Now it's --vbr-mtrh and -Z has disappeared, anything to do with my critique above??..
(which will now be
referred to as merely the lamelines; look for --lameline 1 and --lameline 2 to soon appear
in a lame build nearest you) in one short section of a single sample
MegaLOL
It's sad that we don't have a wether channel in denmark; now I have to wait for the news to see if hell actually have frose over.
Originally posted by Jansemanden
It's sad that we don't have a wether channel in denmark; now I have to wait for the news to see if hell actually have frose over.
Look out the window and check if pigs can fly.
--
GCP