I know this is taboo - re-encoding a lossy format like mp3 produces lower quality.
I understand this - however, when I'm splitting mp3's made by albumwrap etc...some files will not split properly so I have to re-encode them. I know some of you will not agree with my method but it always works properly after I re-encode. This is on only 1 out of every 30 files I find. I would never under normal circumstances re-encode an MP3.
My question is this - If I have a 320 CBR MP3 song file and I re-encode with let's say Nero or Musicmatch's encoder...what is the best recommendation to encode at?
Should I encode at 320 CBR again? Should I try 256 CBR? Or should I encode to VBR MP3? Although it will lose some quality - thats ok...question is - what is the next best format? I have EAC (Exact Audio Copy) with LAME 3.97, It doesn't allow me to encode mp3 or I would use it or am I missing something. Any help on the subject is appreciated.
a program can split mp3s... mp3splitter, I think? A few programs can do this, actually. You can use foobar2000 to encode with lame 3.97 : it can take pretty much any input file.
Just do searches for this.
EAC extracts audio from an audio CD. If set-up properly it will then encode the extracted audio as mp3. It can use LAME to encode. EAC isn't primarily an encoder, it is an DAE program that has provisions to do encoding as an additional step. If you are not starting with an audio CD, there are significantly simpler ways of going about encoding audio into mp3. There are all sorts of encoding front-ends that make the task easier, such as Razorlame and all2lame.
If you are starting with an audio CD, "It doesn't allow me to encode mp3 " means only that you haven't done some of the EAC set-up correctly.
If you decode an mp3 to wav, then want to re-encode, the proper question is "what do you want to have as a result?" Your post reads as though you are starting with 320 CBR files. Is this what your druthers would be or just what the source you happen to be able to obtain? Fear not an iota of returning to 320 CBR if that is you goal. It is the highest quality possible for mp3 and at least all your files would be in the same format.
If you want to save storage space, use -V 2 --vbr-new, the LAME VBR "standard" for general transparancy. If you want even smaller files, experiment with other LAME settings and some ABX tests to find out what suits you.
Re-encoding isn't generally recommended but in a great many instances it works just fine. The loss of quality is more theoretical than detectable. Multiple re-encoding would be pushing probabilities, however.
Thank you for your honest opinions...although I'm fairly new to the scene, I have absorbed a great deal from others like yourselves. This I believe in turn produces better quality sound files for all to enjoy.
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Moderation: Removed unnecessary quote[/span]
You also might find some relief in encoding with a different format, for instance, mpc or ogg as it would add different artifacts instead of adding similar artifacts.
You may also try mp3directcut (www.mpesch3.de) that splits mp3 without reencoding. You can split mp3-files according to cue-files with it.
Regards,
weaker