Well, got Lame install with iTunes.. ( Mac OS X ), and all is well,
however, want to make a better recording that what I was using.
in iTunes;
MP3; 256 vbr / Stereo with Subsonic filter, and Error Correction, Sound Quality Excellent.
So, what I been using is:
-v -V0 -b256 -ms -q0
however, I still feel it could use further tweaks...
using 3.95 Lame ( for now )
So, what should I add or take away..., and space is not a problem
800 GB of storage.
Thanks -
If space is not an issue, why are you not using a lossless format?
Also, try a newer version of LAME and 3.90.3 and see which you prefer, if there is a reason for a lossy version.
I would recommend you look at something like WACK, if you have that kind of storage. With WACK, you could rip both to lossy and lossless.
Brent
Try the sticky topics in the mp3-forums and the MP3-FAQ.
Yeah, you could do better on your command line.
Try the presets.
And a newer version (or a tested one)
Yeah, you could do better on your command line.
Try the presets.
And a newer version (or a tested one)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=303845"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Try some of the present, like insane.. however,
they still need some tweaks... like: -ms
zpro: Could you possibly explain exactly why --preset insane needs any tweaks? Especially one theoretically can lower quality like -ms. One or two problem samples isn't much of a reason to go against what they are tuned to use IMO
Anyhow with 800GB of space I'd seriously recommend looking into a lossless format.
Yeah, you could do better on your command line.
Try the presets.
And a newer version (or a tested one)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=303845"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Try some of the present, like insane.. however,
they still need some tweaks... like: -ms
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=303852"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sure, all the people here at HA that tested the presets couldn't figure that one out. Thanks for letting us know!
i sense a trashy thread.
zpro: Could you possibly explain exactly why --preset insane needs any tweaks? Especially one theoretically can lower quality like -ms. One or two problem samples isn't much of a reason to go against what they are tuned to use IMO
Anyhow with 800GB of space I'd seriously recommend looking into a lossless format.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=303855"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, when I did it , the rip mp3 was in joint stereo.
not stereo., and being a 267 kbps rip, joint stereo should not be used.
So, that why I add -ms ( to make it stereo..) also notice that it does a -h
instead of -q0
What makes you think that joint stereo SHOULD NOT be used?
There's plenty to read about JS and also q0 on the forums.
what a great thread!
recycle bin time!
If space is not an issue, why are you not using a lossless format?
Also, try a newer version of LAME and 3.90.3 and see which you prefer, if there is a reason for a lossy version.
I would recommend you look at something like WACK, if you have that kind of storage. With WACK, you could rip both to lossy and lossless.
Brent
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=303841")
Synthetic Soul has been helping me set up my EAC>WACK>LAME+WAVPAK so that in one rip i can get MP3 as well as a lossless file. this thread covers quite a lot and i am grateful for the time these guys have spent helping me. It mighthelp you too.
the link is [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=34384]http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=34384[/url]
zpro, please read the FAQ (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=7516).
Especially the MP3 section.
And especially the answers to "Why is joint stereo better than pure stereo".
There are dozens of threads about it on this board, please do a search.
Arghhhhhh