Skip to main content
Topic: Wow! Would somebody post here please! (Read 4398 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Or is everyone on this board from r3mix and so already have another place to discuss mp3 already??? :insane:

Is this place empty or what? :lurk:

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #1
Well, this has been open only 17 hours so far...
Juha Laaksonheimo

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #2
Here you are


Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #4
I have posted here, as you requested.
This site is quite good and informative, I thoroughly enjoyed reading every bit of it and the forum, I really enjoy being here with you guys and all.

Much love.

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #5
Hey, if you're interested in mp3 encoding, check out www.r3mix.net too.

Still the forum on mp3 with better info and bigger populaion 

In fact, I would suggest that those who are already based from r3mix keep posting on that side for now

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #6
Hi Frisky and welcome! (Well I'm new here myself, we all are  )

What do you mean by '192k or 256k VBR'? VBR mp3s have variable bitrates by nature. What exactly are the arguments your use for LAME?

If you use --r3mix or -dm-preset-std you should have files with average bitrate below 192k and very good quality. (>CBR192k)

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #7
joe/jo/the deaf earphone maniac,

as requested... 

cheers,
albert 

  errr, what did i want to add to this topic?  oh yes, although i was a "somewhat" active poster in the r3mix forum, and while i have said that --r3mix was very good enough for most purposes, i really archive lossless only.  BUT... only in my work, my friend.

not to say that i have pristine ears, but i DO have (i think) pristine equipment.  (need it, it's my job.)  and while i really don't do any technical evaluation on mp3's accuracy and stuff, i DO notice audio that had been compressed as an mp3, --r3mix, --dm-preset and all.  esp. when you run the audio through some filter/dynamics plug-in, like eq or an expander.  there is something about that waveform that, while uneffected may come by unnoticed, when processed sounds funny.  i am referring to the wishy-washy-ness and the pre-echo of course.

although i must say that 90% of listeners wouldn't involve themselves, their 100% attention, shut their eyes, and forget-about-the-world whenever they listen to some classical cd let's say, at the optimum level, at the sweet spot, and all...  i mean, it's just nonsense, so for all practical purposes, mp3 would do.  that's why it may sound funny, and contradictory, but despite being a record engineer, i have a ton of mp3s!!!  shall i go on and differentiate lame and xing? 

oops, did i go off-topic? 

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #8
www.r3mix.net has a comprehensive guide to answer a lot of your questions (except the ones about MPC) :reading:

Although you won't hear this site and r3mix mentioning each other much because, err, they weren't on speaking terms a while ago
:flamewar: :battle: :argue:

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #9
Quote
Originally posted by Joe Bloggs
www.r3mix.net has a comprehensive guide to answer a lot of your questions (except the ones about MPC) :reading: 

Although you won't hear this site and r3mix mentioning each other much because, err, they weren't on speaking terms a while ago


First, I'd rather the negativity be dropped.

Second, your assumption that I would not mention r3mix.net is very wrong.  I have no problem telling people about the site.  However, I do not agree with the testing methodologies promoted there and this has nothing to do with recent events.  Myself and many others know that frequency analysis to judge codec quality is about as worthless a test as there can be.  In addition, using simple frequency sweeps on top of that (which induce clipping) and then dismissing certain encoders entirely based only on that alone is just as flawed.

The only real way to judge quality in a psychoacoustic encoder is with a listening test.

r3mix.net does have some good information on it, but a lot of the information about quality is very misleading as I mentioned above.  You also see things like 256kbps = CD Quality, while 128kbps does not.  Unfortunately there are no absolutes in psychoacoustic encoding, and nothing is this clearly defined, but you do not see this type of thinking emphasized there.

Information in regards to ripping or whatever else provided there is pretty useful though.

If you want some objective information on quality though (apart from this site, as there is no FAQ here yet), I suggest you check out ff123's site.  It is one of the few sites out there that is truly about objectivity when discussing technical issues in relation to quality.  The link is http://ff123.net as mentioned on the front page, though I think the new dns for ff123's site hasn't quite propagated yet.

Please drop the negativity though and continually bringing up past events which are of no matter anymore.  If discussions on that topic continues, I will lock the thread.  This is nothing personal and I am sorry if this response seems heavy handed, but I am not going to allow the discussion to degenerate into a flamefest.  I'm sure you can understand.

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #10
ahem

:me tries to put out the message correctly this time:

You can also take a look at www.r3mix.net. Got tons of info about LAME mp3 encoding and may answer a lot of your questions (not the MPC ones of course) but some people have doubts about its objectivity...

http://ff123.net/ is another recomended site

Dibrom: wow, what can I say, great moderation! I just wonder if you'll have time to manually split threads, move, cut and paste like this in future when the board gets bigger

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #11
:spank:

Hey, relax! I was trying to put a relaxed spin to it... see the emoIcons?

Yeah, I'll take a look at ff123's site... r3mix's site looks prettier though (and this one prettier still  )

**This is nuts! I'm absolutely dominating the off-topic board!! :wtf:

More OT: have you noticed that you have two emoIcons both represented by 'eek'? How am I supposed to access the blue icky one?

Wow! Would somebody post here please!

Reply #12
Joe, I have moved your post back to this thread.  Please do not cross post from split threads.

Also, you have linked to r3mix.net 3 or 4 times in this thread already, continuing to do so everywhere else on this board is unnecessary and is starting to become annoying.  It is fine if you want to tell people about another website, but please do not make it the main topic of discussion in your every post.

Somewhere else I have seen you also recommend people post to the r3mix forum and I believe you meant to the exclusion of this forum.  I do not appreciate this.

Please try to stay on topic and realize that people are on this board because they are interested in this board.  They do not constantly need to be reminded to go somewhere else whenever they mention something mp3 related.  I hope and expect that others will not do that in regards to this forum when discussing issues on the r3mix forum, and I expect the same behavior here.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020