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 CBR vs. VBR and 320 CBR vs. Lame Insane (Read 8250 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

320 CBR vs. VBR and 320 CBR vs. Lame Insane

1) Why wouldn't 320 VBR with minimum 320 be at worst the same as 320 CBR, and possibly better if a particular passage warrants it?

2) Is there a general consensus between Lame V0 insane and 320 CBR, as to whether they are equal? In another forum, it was stated that Insane is the same, except that it only allocated less if the frame is quiet or "inaudible," whatever that means. I suspect that the matter must have been settled here by now.

320 CBR vs. VBR and 320 CBR vs. Lame Insane

Reply #1
320 k vbr doesn't exist because most decoders are limited to 320k frames - thus CBR 320k is the strongest working setting. If there was no frame limit, VBR 320k should have been better than CBR for obvious reasons. 320k minimum VBR would probably activate Lame INSANE setting.

Insane should be stronger than V0 for reasons stated above, but much less efficient as bitrate cannot rise or fall. Also it will use a more sensitive hearing curve.

320 CBR vs. VBR and 320 CBR vs. Lame Insane

Reply #2
if you need the highest possible quality lame can offer use the insane preset. if you want to get slightly smaller files with minimal quality loss, use -V 0. no need to add other switches like setting a minimum bitrate.