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: List of recommended LAME settings (Read 648841 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #225
I see it already recommended in both the recommended settings and recommended compiles threads.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #226
no, I mean john33s special variant of 3.90.3 that accepts the new switches (--preset, even --preset medium).

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #227
There is a slight mismatch currently between the "recommended compile" thread and the "recommended settings" thread:

Quote
ABR Setting tuned from 320 kbps down to 8 kbps

--alt-preset <bitrate>


but this is only valid for John33:s modified compile. The non-modifed compile only works down to 80 kbps I think.

So either you could do as amano suggests and change the recommended compile, or add a note to the abr settings in this thread. Either way is OK for me.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #228
Hi.

Isn't the documentation included in the reccomended compile anymore...?...

3.90.3

Also...just a question...
In the thread(1st Post) 'List of recommended LAME settings' , I read...
Quote
BTW:
MPC is the most advanced format for Hifi and Audiophile needs. For more information click here.

Is it 'so' official in all respects...that ;...that info was included in the Post ?
- kind of, makes you feel odd when d/loading the compile..  :-)
I think when I last read the post , that bit of info was not there...

--------------------
Autumnrain.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #229
Quote
Isn't the documentation included in the reccomended compile anymore...?...

Obviously not. I said something along these lines in the recommended compiles thread. Maybe someone finally add the necessary files to this package...


Quote
I think when I last read the post , that bit of info was not there...


It's there as long as i can remember. User added it someday, i guess.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #230
I just added all the html docs to all the 3.90.3 downloads.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #231
 

H e y ......... Thanks! :-)

~~~~~~~~~~

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #232
OK, Im a bit confused.

Ive been searching looking for the best settings and i read that 3.90.3 has a
"--alt-preset fast standard" but that it has "potentially" less quality than just
"--alt-preset standard"

Is this true?  maybe i should just go with "insane"??

Thanks!

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #233
While it is true that --alt-preset fast standard sacrifices a little quality for some increase in encoding speed, the difference might be small enough for you to not notice.

Try listening to --alt-preset fast standard and --alt-preset standard yourself, and find what's best for you.

There's some chance that --alt-preset insane would be overkill for you. I would urge you to try standard or fast standard before checking insane out.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #234
don't forget --alt-preset extreme
it's like insane - just vbr, which saves a few bits

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #235
Thanks guys!!

Ill try a combination of them.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #236
no, a combination is not possible (inside 1 track / during encoding...)


of course you could use aps for not so important albums, ape or api for more important music.

or aps, for portable eg.


btw, ape is not like api with more bits:


Only api uses --nssafejoint. A safer stereo image.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #237
That sounds funny. I think I've seen Dibrom mention that all the --alt-preset VBR presets never sacrifice the stereo image. IIRC he even mentioned that the stereo image when using all --alt-preset files should be "more intact" than when merely using --nssafejoint.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #238
--aps/ape/api all use --nssafejoint.

 

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #240
I have always used -V 0 -b 128.  How does this compare to the presets?  Is it pretty much the same as --alt-preset extreme??
gentoo ~amd64 + layman | ncmpcpp/mpd | wavpack + vorbis + lame

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #241
Quote
I have always used -V 0 -b 128.  How does this compare to the presets?  Is it pretty much the same as --alt-preset extreme??

No. Add the --verbose switch to both commandlines and (many of) the settings used will be shown in DOS window.
Let's suppose that rain washes out a picnic. Who is feeling negative? The rain? Or YOU? What's causing the negative feeling? The rain or your reaction? - Anthony De Mello

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #242
Quote
Quote
I have always used -V 0 -b 128.  How does this compare to the presets?  Is it pretty much the same as --alt-preset extreme??

No. Add the --verbose switch to both commandlines and (many of) the settings used will be shown in DOS window.

More importantly, -V0 -b128 doesn't have the --alt-preset code-level tunings.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #243
Just posting this here, as well, as it is related.

Quote
I have noticed when using the alt-preset standard with lame 3.90.3, that the quality setting is rated at 2, which is equivalent to the -h-switch. Would it improve quality to override this with the -q 0-switch?

I wonder because it has been said on numerous occasions that one "should not mess with the alt-presets" and that only the one that has created them fully understands them.


Quote
Tried the following:

File:

R.E.M. - New Adventures in Hi-Fi - 06 - That's What Keeps Me Down.wav (77 147 996 bytes)

Using --alt-preset standard it gave this file

R.E.M. - New Adventures in Hi-Fi - 06 - That's What Keeps Me Down.mp3 (12 274 191 bytes)

Using --alt-preset standard -q 0 gave this file

R.E.M. - New Adventures in Hi-Fi - 06 - That's What Keeps Me Down.mp3 (12 254 269 bytes)


So as you can see, the no -q 0 was larger (but not much).


I'm trusting the --alt-presets, I'm just wondering why --alt-preset standard would be better than --alt-preset standard -q 0?

According to the description in the .htmls enclosed in Dibrom's own compilation (and every other lame-compilation to my knowledge) it says:

-q 0..9 algorithm quality selection
Bitrate is of course the main influence on quality. The higher the bitrate, the higher the quality. But for a given bitrate, we have a choice of algorithms to determine the best scalefactors and huffman encoding (noise shaping).

-q 0: use slowest & best possible version of all algorithms. -q 0 and -q 1 are slow and may not produce significantly higher quality.

-q 2: recommended. Same as -h.

-q 5: default value. Good speed, reasonable quality.

-q 7: same as -f. Very fast, ok quality. (psycho acoustics are used for pre-echo & M/S, but no noise shaping is done.

-q 9: disables almost all algorithms including psy-model. poor quality.


NOTE: I didn't hear differences between the two, and the -q 0 was much slower, but if quality is what one wants, which does one choose?


Erlend

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #244
Quote
I'm trusting the --alt-presets, I'm just wondering why --alt-preset standard would be better than --alt-preset standard -q 0?


Why should that be???

"-q 0" ist just smaller, so better compressed, that´s all ...
Size does not *always* mean quality!

*grin*

BTW, "-q 0" is not supposed to add quality when used together with the presets - those presets are optimized around "-q 2" and changing this can even *reduce* quality!

(Quoting from memory, cannot provide you with a link - but is´s from Dibrom or JohnV, when i recall correctly)

Have Fun
3.90.3 --alt-preset extreme -V0 --lowpass 20.5 -> yeah!
"extremist of extreme", johnV @ Sep 13 2002 - 02:01 PM  ;-)


List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #246
Quote
NOTE: I didn't hear differences between the two, and the -q 0 was much slower, but if quality is what one wants, which does one choose?


Erlend

That one was just ONE example.
I seriously doubt that Dibrom encoded one song only once and then figured out "2" was better than "0"
Again, my friend, the alt presets have gone through more testing than you could imagine, and with quality as the main concern. Not speed or size. Trust them the way they are.
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #247
Quote
Quote
(How to)
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file

I hope I'm not OT, but the page linked is ,http://www.monkeysaudio.com; is this right? 

of course it is right.

Monkeys audio did the trick for me.

(reencoding HQ mp3 to 130 kbit/s mp3 with keeping tags.)

just configure it.

List of recommended LAME settings

Reply #248
Ok, thanks for the info
[ Commodore 64 Forever...! ]