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: 320 sounding better than V0? (Read 11272 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

320 sounding better than V0?

I'm not sure what to do... I have two versions of a file, one is ripped at 320 kbps and the other is ripped at V0. The 320 kbps version sounds indistinguishable to the original Flac version, while the V0 version introduces some noticeable hiss throughout the opening part of the song (the first 11 seconds or so).

The name of the song is called "Drill" by a guy named Frank Klepacki. It's part of the really ancient Command & Conquer: Red Alert soundtrack. If you want to check this out for yourselves and validate whether or not you can hear the difference. The difference is certainly present for my ears, at really high volume levels.

I want my music to sound as good as possible. At the same time, encoding everything to 320 kbps seems bloating and wasteful. Would you go with V0 or 320 kbps for your entire collection? Should i just cut the encoder a little slack and ignore the one bad encode, and trust that there are no others? Any ideas?

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #1 –
Please Read  TOS #8

And backup the claim with evidence. before you have done examination your claim is uninteresting.
I recommend to do a proper ABX testing, and you should be able to find tools for that in the forum guidelines
Sven Bent - Denmark

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #2 –
Can you post a sample showing the problem and the same sample of the original flac version.
Who are you and how did you get in here ?
I'm a locksmith, I'm a locksmith.

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #3 –
Quote from: TerminalReality on
I'm not sure what to do... I have two versions of a file, one is ripped at 320 kbps and the other is ripped at V0. The 320 kbps version sounds indistinguishable to the original Flac version, while the V0 version introduces some noticeable hiss throughout the opening part of the song (the first 11 seconds or so).

The name of the song is called "Drill" by a guy named Frank Klepacki. It's part of the really ancient Command & Conquer: Red Alert soundtrack. If you want to check this out for yourselves and validate whether or not you can hear the difference. The difference is certainly present for my ears, at really high volume levels.

I want my music to sound as good as possible. At the same time, encoding everything to 320 kbps seems bloating and wasteful. Would you go with V0 or 320 kbps for your entire collection? Should i just cut the encoder a little slack and ignore the one bad encode, and trust that there are no others? Any ideas?

MP3.. has a maximum supported bitrate of only 320kbps, so the V0 version at it's best moments can go up to only 320 kbps, whilst the 320k cbr version stays at 320 throughout the duration of the track

that's why you're liking the 320kbps cbr version more

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #4 –
Quote from: darkalex on

MP3.. has a maximum supported bitrate of only 320kbps, so the V0 version at it's best moments can go up to only 320 kbps, whilst the 320k cbr version stays at 320 throughout the duration of the track

that's why you're liking the 320kbps cbr version more

LAME V0 setting has been very finely tuned over the years, so there should be no difference between the 2.
Some ABX testing is really needed for this track.

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #5 –
V0 saves bits where the psychoacoustic model deems it unnecessary to use 320 kbps, and can invest the saved bits into places where more are needed. However, both 320 kbps and V0 are insanely high in quality, outside of well-characterised problem samples, you shouldn't be able to detect any differences from the original lossless format. Unless you were trained specifically in psychoacoustics before, or you're a 16 year old (or any age, but dog whistles strongly annoy you) with excellent audio hardware (that exhibit very low levels of THD, crosstalk etc).

Or you have some aural... quirks... that push you to either extreme of the gaussian curve of human listeners.

Regardless of the reasons, please ABX first.

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #6 –
You can try 256 CBR ( or abr) as an alternative to 320 . At these bitrates cbr mode
is robust in my experience.
 

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #7 –
IgorC's listening test on 2021, comparing LAME V0, LAME CBR 320kbps, among other things, is a good place to start the discussion.

Re: 320 sounding better than V0?

Reply #8 –
Quote from: TerminalReality on
(the first 11 seconds or so)
The site has a cap on 30 seconds audio posted: https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/board,35.0.html 
11 seconds would be well within.
And sure post your own listening results too.

Quote from: TerminalReality on
I want my music to sound as good as possible. At the same time, encoding everything to 320 kbps seems bloating and wasteful. Would you go with V0 or 320 kbps for your entire collection? Should i just cut the encoder a little slack and ignore the one bad encode, and trust that there are no others? Any ideas?
I'm ripping to lossless. Hard drive space is cheap - a TB is enough for two to three months of music depending on genre - and then rips can be both retro-verified and even in certain instances repaired, using CUETools.
You can always transcode to lossy for portable use. For in-car? V0 is bloat too!