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: -V2 vs. -V0 and lowpass filter (Read 2481 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

-V2 vs. -V0 and lowpass filter

hi there,

I wonder why --preset extreme (-V0) uses a higher lowpass than --preset standard (-V2). I mean, the goal of -V2 is to be transparent and for the few cases where it isn't I doubt it has something to do with a too low set lowpass.

There are samples where -V0 sounds better than -V2, but isn't -V0 basically just -V2 with a higher lowpass? Since high frequencies need a lot of bandwith I wonder if there's a sample where -V1 or maybe even -V2 sounds better than -V0...

Another thing I've always wondered about is why some --preset CBR 192 file uses a lowpass of 19.5khz or --preset 192 lowpasses at 19.6khz...isn't that a bit too much? -V2 lowpasses at 19.0khz and has pretty much no restriction how much bits it can use... in opposite to some 192 CBR/ABR file..., besides that it's set up to be transparent...

thanks
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'

-V2 vs. -V0 and lowpass filter

Reply #1 –
Quote
There are samples where -V0 sounds better than -V2, but isn't -V0 basically just -V2 with a higher lowpass?

Try comparing the details --verbose shows from the commandline.

Quote
Since high frequencies need a lot of bandwith I wonder if there's a sample where -V1 or maybe even -V2 sounds better than -V0...

imbo, its possible but very marginaly so.

Quote
Another thing I've always wondered about is why some --preset CBR 192 file uses a lowpass of 19.5khz or --preset 192 lowpasses at 19.6khz...isn't that a bit too much? -V2 lowpasses at 19.0khz and has pretty much no restriction how much bits it can use... in opposite to some 192 CBR/ABR file..., besides that it's set up to be transparent...

Its certainly too high a lowpass for me, but this is HA.
Plenty of reason for me to use the --lowpass switch.
CBR rates are setup to be as transparent as possible too, and at 192 kbs the bit reservoir will be filling up like crazy, only getting empty occasionaly or when things get really tough. With all the finely tuned psychocode methods employed, thats the lowpass 192 has been observed to be able to handle -anything less is a bonus then  .
no conscience > no custom

-V2 vs. -V0 and lowpass filter

Reply #2 –
The behaviour regarding sfb21 is different in cbr/abr and in vbr. Cbr/abr behaves like vbr with -Y.