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: Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best? (Read 6044 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

L.S.

I carried out a listening test with someone who claimed to hear the difference between an orignal piece of music (i.e. in WAV format) and MP3. I thought that he meant MP3's encoded at 128 kbps and stuph but he was convinced that he could hear even at highest bitrates...And he didn't do the test before...

So, I took a piece of classical music and encoded it with RazorLame (and LAME of coarse) at 320 kbps. Precise settings I can look up tomorrow if necessary, since I assume that nobody will believe me (regardless of the settings) at 320 kbps. For the test I burnt a CD with ten tracks: 5 original and 5 encoded (and decoded back to WAV) in an arbitrary order.

My friend spent an evening with listening and he was able to give me the right tracklist! I asked him to listen to differences since he didn't know the original, to prevent the debat about preferred music in terms of perception.

My question is, is LAME the best encoder available since I want to redo the test resulting in an inconclusive track list. What he did mention was that if he would hear this song "stand-alone" he would not be able to tell that it must be an MP3.

Regards,
Jacco
Logical reasoning brings you from a to b, imagination brings you everywhere.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #2 –
Maybe you should have just used "--alt-preset insane"?
How did you convert back to wav?

Out of interest, what equipment was your friend listening on?

I was thinking of doing the same test (but including ogg vorbis, mpc etc as well) on a friend of mine who's hifi equipment probably costs more than my car. Kinda lost interest in it now that I've started doing some abx'ing myself. We "know" the mp3 and the wav aren't identical, that's the whole point. What matters for me is whether the loss of date hampers my enjoyment of listening to the music.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #3 –
i dont wanna be bad or anything but if your friend wanna prove he is right he'd have to do the blind test in front of you... taking the cd home, ripping it and running aucdtect on it is kinda easier than blind testing 

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #4 –
Quote
As per rule #8, listening tests should be conducted both double-blind and observed.


I know, that is why I put it as question. Not as a result that can carry everybodies agreement. It was a blind test and that guy doesn't even have a computer so for me that will do. I listened to it in Foobar on a laptop and I can not tell the difference. However, on a stand alone CD player there is. So, I don't know how to perform double-blind test's that have your ok, since it is maybe impossible to notice the difference in the first place on a "CPU-based" player.

Regards,
Jacco
Logical reasoning brings you from a to b, imagination brings you everywhere.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #5 –
Hello.

As for the question: I gather this is lossy we talking about, give musepack
(mpc) a go. Then, for comparing source (wav) with 320. (api. i assume)
For comparisons reason, api. have a default lowpass at 20500,
so for a person who listen a lot to music, to hear a difference should be
easy. (depends on how much compression used.)

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #6 –
Bypassing your last two unfounded claims, I fail to see the difficulty in observing the test as it is carried out.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #7 –
Hello n68,
Quote
give musepack (mpc) a go
I was not aware of this format but it looks appealing: a lossy codec focussed on high quality. For backing up stuph I use APE. Thanks anyway.

For holkie (and perhaps others):
Quote
ripping it and running aucdtect
That guy doesn't have a computer. A rare thing but he spends his money on high-end stuph and trying to understand why something sounds like something. As I do by the way.

Marty:
Quote
Maybe you should have just used "--alt-preset insane"?
How did you convert back to wav?
No I used other settings, if needed I can look them up tomorrow.
Quote
What matters for me is whether the loss of date hampers my enjoyment of listening to the music.
Me too and to reflect that to my observation: he couldn't tell which one was MP3 or original. So, the conclusion is that there is a difference but which is better is not to be said.

Regards,
Jacco
Logical reasoning brings you from a to b, imagination brings you everywhere.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #8 –
Quote
Quote
Maybe you should have just used "--alt-preset insane"?
How did you convert back to wav?
No I used other settings, if needed I can look them up tomorrow.

Then you probably used the default settings, which for =<3.94 is considerably worse than the "--alt-preset" settings. It would probably be more difficult (however not impossible) for him to pick out the tracks if you used the recommended settings and version of lame. Currently, using lame 3.90.3 with --alt-preset insane is considered the best you can do with the MP3 format. Checkout the recommended settings & compile threads for mor info.

EDIT: Changed >3.94 to =<3.94

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #9 –
classical music with --api is extremely hard to abx in my experience...

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #10 –
Quote
Then you probably used the default settings, which for >3.94 is considerably worse than the "--alt-preset" settings

???

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #11 –
In 3.96.1, isn't -b 320 exactly the same as --preset insane?

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #12 –
Quote
Quote
Then you probably used the default settings, which for >3.94 is considerably worse than the "--alt-preset" settings

???
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=243136"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Looks like a typo: he must have meant <.
It is v3.95.1 that uses the new -Vx preset system, not v3.94, too.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #13 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
Then you probably used the default settings, which for >3.94 is considerably worse than the "--alt-preset" settings

???
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=243136"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Looks like a typo: he must have meant <.
It is v3.95.1 that uses the new -Vx preset system, not v3.94, too.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=243221"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sorry!!! of course I meant < (actually =< ...)

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #14 –
Hi,

My settings were:

-b 320 -m s -q 0 --cbr

I can't remember how I came to this in the past, probably this was the best at that time. Please correct me if this is not the best possible solution. I am only interested in the best, nothing else.

Regards,
Jacco
Logical reasoning brings you from a to b, imagination brings you everywhere.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #15 –
best would be "--alt-preset insane"  or with newer lame versions just -b 320 i think.

-ms is worse than joint stereo and -q 0 is experimental

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #16 –
Hello.

@dekkersj.
Why not use extreme/V0, i think classical can benefit more from vbr
then ex: metal. Another thing i want to point at is that most lame problem
samples i`ve heard is mid-birate vbr, I can`t say i have heard any
problems with anything above 200 vbr and -ms -q0.
With api, you do. The majority of samples with problems, are aps,
and -ms with such bitrate will likely couse crisp sound in HF.

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #17 –
ok,

I will change the stereo mode to joint stereo and I will try --preset insane as setting. According to the preset.html file this is the highest possible quality (also with joint-stereo)

Thanks for the reactions so far,
Jacco
Logical reasoning brings you from a to b, imagination brings you everywhere.
 

Is 320 kbps LAME encoded MP3 the best?

Reply #18 –
Don't forget that the version of lame can be important, 3.90.3 is still the recommended one, i.e not the newest.