IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Mareo or Wack?, Can't decide...
Apostulate
post Jan 18 2006, 05:16
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 16-December 05
Member No.: 26443



I'm really looking for which one is more user friendly, updated more frequently (possibly from suggestions or requests by users) and has most available encoding options...

One question that I do have about AAC encoding using ITunesEncode is: It encodes using the encoder available in your current version of Itunes, right? So the Itunes AAC files that received such high ratings in the new 128kbps ABX test results would be available to me using that specific version of Itunes.


Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Jan 18 2006, 12:06
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (Apostulate @ Jan 18 2006, 04:16 AM)
I'm really looking for which one is more user friendly, updated more frequently (possibly from suggestions or requests by users) and has most available encoding options...
I must admit I don't use either, but I think the response you will normally get will be users recommending the one they use - i.e.: subjective rather than objective.

I think both are pretty evenly matched, and it probably boils down more to what you specific requirements are - which you haven't stated.

As far as downsides: WACK requires the .NET framework (no biggie), and MAREO only works with tracks I believe.

QUOTE (Apostulate @ Jan 18 2006, 04:16 AM)
One question that I do have about AAC encoding using ITunesEncode is: It encodes using the encoder available in your current version of Itunes, right?  So the Itunes AAC files that received such high ratings in the new 128kbps ABX test results would be available to me using that specific version of Itunes.
I believe I am right in saying that it will encode using the settings you have chosen in iTunes (e.g.: 192 VBR M4A over 128 CBR M4A) but you can specify the actual encoder on the command line, using the -e switch.

QUOTE (readme46.txt)
CODE
 -e EncoderName   Lets you specify the encoder iTunes will use.
                  Choose from "AAC Encoder", "WAV Encoder",
                  "MP3 Encoder", "AIFF Encoder",
                  or "Lossless Encoder".
                  (Default is "AAC Encoder".)
I think then that the answer to your question is "Yes" - as long as you have set 128Kbps VBR M4A as your codec of choice in iTunes then when using the "AAC Encoder" profile you will get 128Kbps VBR M4A, rather than the default 128Kbps CBR M4A files.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jaybeee
post Jan 18 2006, 12:30
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 410
Joined: 20-October 04
From: UK
Member No.: 17750



What about REACT instead?
Not used it but seems good.
I used to use MAREO but have no need to anymore.


--------------------
http://www.health4ni.com/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Apostulate
post Jan 19 2006, 02:09
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 16-December 05
Member No.: 26443



QUOTE (jaybeee @ Jan 18 2006, 06:30 AM)
What about REACT instead?
Not used it but seems good.
I used to use MAREO but have no need to anymore.
*



Why do you no longer need Mareo.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Apostulate
post Jan 19 2006, 02:11
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 16-December 05
Member No.: 26443



[quote=Synthetic Soul,Jan 18 2006, 06:06 AM]

As far as downsides: WACK requires the .NET framework (no biggie), and MAREO only works with tracks I believe.

So Mareo doesn't do disc images?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jaybeee
post Jan 19 2006, 09:52
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 410
Joined: 20-October 04
From: UK
Member No.: 17750



QUOTE (Apostulate @ Jan 19 2006, 01:09 AM)
QUOTE (jaybeee @ Jan 18 2006, 06:30 AM)
What about REACT instead?
Not used it but seems good.
I used to use MAREO but have no need to anymore.
*



Why do you no longer need Mareo.
*


I rip my CD audio to FLAC. Then just do a mass transcode, whenever I like, overnight using foobar to the format of my choice. Just a personal preference. I never had a problem with MAREO and used it for a while. Just how I do things now that's all.


--------------------
http://www.health4ni.com/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Jan 19 2006, 10:03
Post #7





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (Apostulate @ Jan 19 2006, 01:11 AM)
QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Jan 18 2006, 06:06 AM)
As far as downsides: WACK requires the .NET framework (no biggie), and MAREO only works with tracks I believe.
So Mareo doesn't do disc images?
I guess you could use MAREO to encode to an image - but why bother? MAREO isn't set up to work with cuesheets (which accompany an image), unlike REACT or WACK.

I think we need to know what you are trying to achieve. Are you planning to encode to multiple formats (the requirement of WACK or MAREO suggests so)? Do you want a lossless image with track lossy files? Do you want multiple image files (unlikely but possible)? Do yoy even want an image file, or do you want multiple track files?

I could answer your questions a lot more easily if I knew what your intentions are.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Apostulate
post Jan 19 2006, 13:45
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 16-December 05
Member No.: 26443



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Jan 19 2006, 04:03 AM)
QUOTE (Apostulate @ Jan 19 2006, 01:11 AM)
QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Jan 18 2006, 06:06 AM)
As far as downsides: WACK requires the .NET framework (no biggie), and MAREO only works with tracks I believe.
So Mareo doesn't do disc images?
I guess you could use MAREO to encode to an image - but why bother? MAREO isn't set up to work with cuesheets (which accompany an image), unlike REACT or WACK.

I think we need to know what you are trying to achieve. Are you planning to encode to multiple formats (the requirement of WACK or MAREO suggests so)? Do you want a lossless image with track lossy files? Do you want multiple image files (unlikely but possible)? Do yoy even want an image file, or do you want multiple track files?

I could answer your questions a lot more easily if I knew what your intentions are.
*



Well, what I'm trying to do is get FLAC image file coupled with mp3s and AAC files. I tried my first test run of WACK last night. It worked fine for the FLAC image and the mp3 files (although I'm still trying to figure out how to get it to return a log of the rip of the mp3s). The AAC files didn't go thru because I hadn't set up Itunes properly as of yet, so it just bypassed that portion. A log of the entire WACK encoding process would be great too. I seem to have accomplished what I wanted, other than for the Itunes slip up. But a few questions:

In the custom encoding options for AAC in Itunes, there is an option for optimizing for voice. What does this do? And is it useful? For now, I'm not going to select it, but I'm just curious.

Also, I'm kind of vague on the function of the cuesheet. I know that when you double click it, it causes the associated player to start playing the files, but are there any other uses?

Thank you.

This post has been edited by Apostulate: Jan 19 2006, 13:48
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Jan 19 2006, 14:10
Post #9





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



As an MP3 user I can't really answer you iTunes question; although I would assume that it would be for very low bitrate files - e.g.: dictation - that sort of "voice".

Cuesheets have two main uses: Firstly to point out the track starts for the image, and secondly to store meta data like album, artist, and title info. EAC will also write other data in REM statements, like the date, and disc id. You can open a cuesheet with Notepad - it is only a text file, and the format is very simple.

Cuesheets can also dictate other track indexes. You may see references to INDEX 00 indexes in a cuesheet on this forum, and these cause the CD player to count up from a negative number, which you may have seen. These are generally used to denote the end of a track - e.g.: with a live album TRACK 02 INDEX 00 will be the end of track one, and TRACK 02 INDEX 01 will be the start of track two - while the time inbetween will be talking or crowd noise. Not a huge amount of use though.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th December 2014 - 23:50