IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Upload forum rules

- No over 30 sec clips of copyrighted music. Cite properly and never more than necessary for the discussion.


- No copyrighted software without permission.


- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Nightwish - Angels Fall First
MostlyHarmless
post Sep 8 2012, 12:12
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 23-September 09
Member No.: 73405



QUOTE (IgorC @ Sep 8 2012, 06:13) *
p = 0.03... for 5 trials
p = 0.0039... for 8 trials.


What about 6, 7 attempts?
Just curious, how can I calculate if I want a confidence of, say 99%?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
C.R.Helmrich
post Sep 8 2012, 13:17
Post #27





Group: Developer
Posts: 686
Joined: 6-December 08
From: Erlangen Germany
Member No.: 64012



0.5^number-of-trials. Igor, I wouldn't say 5 is more than enough. It's enough. 4 trials would give you less than the commonly sought 95% confidence.

Chris


--------------------
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 8 2012, 17:29
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 819
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



QUOTE (halb27 @ Sep 6 2012, 20:17) *
Thank you for applauding 3.99.5y, but I'm afraid something has gone wrong.
3.99.5y restricts its functional extension to only -V0+.
Did you use 3.99.5x instead? However 3.99.5x -V5+ doesn't help (for me), it takes an additional --adbr_min 200 to make this sample transparent to me (didn't try lower --adbr_min values).

To me this is not a pre-echo issue but a sample where Lame's psy model isn't quite right, but this flaw is overcome here by original Lame's top quality settings. With 3.99.5y problems like these are tackled by the internal --adbr_min feature which always keeps audio data bitrate above a certain threshold.


Sorry, I'm late replying, hence the full quote.

That's weird. My -V 5+ version was encoded by lame-3.99.5y.zip from your thread about that Lame version, halb27.

The -V 5 version encoded by it was 132kbps, LAME3.99y reported encoder (short string can't display the extra .5)
The -V 5+ version had a load more 320 kbps frames, and came out at 189kbps without running mp3packer. I have attached the -V 5+ version to this post.

--edit: the above info from foobar2000 before I realised I still had the original command prompt open--

I'd assume it's doing something when I run -V 5+ as indicated in --help. Perhaps it's reverting to the behaviour of LAME3.99.5x? Dunno.

Here's a CODEBOX with the --help info and the two encodes I ran. As luck would have it I still have the same Command Prompt Console open so I followed up with a -V 0 and -V 0+ encode, to compare, and there are actually 5 encodes in the following order:

1) lame3.98.4r -V 5
2) lame3.99.5y -V 5+ (file attached to this post)
3) lame3.99.5y -V 5
4) lame3.99.5y -V 0
5) lame3.99.5y -V 0+

I note that the percentage of short blocks is the same in the different encodes including a 3.98.4r encode I didn't spend time ABXing, but the -V 0+ encode is encoded very differently from the -V 5+

Please feel free to download the -V5+ encode attached to this post and examine it or ABX it between 0.9 and 1.9 seconds, or whatever you choose.

CODE
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

//* deleted stuff ... *//
Directory of C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals

06/09/2012 16:16 <DIR> .
06/09/2012 16:16 <DIR> ..
06/09/2012 16:16 3,003,540 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.flac
23/08/2012 19:21 30,072 Impulse at 0.625s 384kHz sampling rate .pk
23/08/2012 19:21 1,920,044 Impulse at 0.625s 384kHz sampling rate .wav
3 File(s) 4,953,656 bytes
2 Dir(s) 7,226,523,648 bytes free

//* deleted stuff including decoding FLAC to WAV... *//

//* I did a quick encode for comparison using LAME3.98r left over from an expired dBpowerAmp
trial, which I didn't spend serious time ABXing, reasoning that using different modes of the same
encoder version might be more meaningful *//

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>"C:\Program Files\Illustrate\dBpoweramp\encoder
\mp3 (Lame)\lame.exe" -V5 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
LAME 3.98.4 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), 3DNow! (ASM used), SSE (ASM used), SSE2
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
to 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=5)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
1154/1154 (100%)| 0:01/ 0:01| 0:01/ 0:01| 17.869x| 0:00
32 [ 8] **
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 0]
80 [ 0]
96 [ 26] %%***
112 [ 230] %%%%%%%%%********************************
128 [ 389] %%%%%%%%%%%%%*******************************************************
160 [ 329] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%********************************************
192 [ 81] %%%************
224 [ 61] %**********
256 [ 21] ****
320 [ 9] %*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
145.9 19.5 80.5 83.3 8.9 7.8
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.4dB

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>lame3995y.exe --help
LAME 32bits version 3.99.5y (http://lame.sf.net)

usage: lame3995y.exe [options] <infile> [outfile]

<infile> and/or <outfile> can be "-", which means stdin/stdout.

RECOMMENDED:
lame -V2 input.wav output.mp3

OPTIONS:
-b bitrate set the bitrate, default 128 kbps
-h higher quality, but a little slower. Recommended.
-f fast mode (lower quality)
-V n quality setting for VBR. default n=4
0=high quality,bigger files. 9=smaller files
-V n+ compared to -V n, -V n+ has a significantly reduced
amount of inaccurately encoded frames due to
lacking data space. Moreover, it doesn't allow
audio data bitrate to go too low
--preset type type must be "medium", "standard", "extreme", "insane",
or a value for an average desired bitrate and depending
on the value specified, appropriate quality settings will
be used.
"--preset help" gives more info on these

--priority type sets the process priority
0,1 = Low priority
2 = normal priority
3,4 = High priority

--help id3 ID3 tagging related options

--longhelp full list of options

--license print License information


C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>lame3995y.exe -V 5+ 05___Angels_Fall_First_ring
ing.wav 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v5plus.mp3
LAME 3.99.5y 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
to 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v5plus.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=5)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
1154/1154 (100%)| 0:02/ 0:02| 0:02/ 0:02| 12.244x| 0:00
32 [ 8] %*
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 0]
80 [ 0]
96 [ 0]
112 [ 19] %%***
128 [ 306] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************************************
160 [ 263] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%*******************************************
192 [ 217] %%%%%%%%%%%**************************************
224 [ 109] %%%%%%*******************
256 [ 91] %%%%*****************
320 [ 141] %%******************************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
189.0 21.3 78.7 83.3 8.9 7.8
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.4dB

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>lame3995y.exe -V 5 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringi
ng.wav 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v5normal.mp3
LAME 3.99.5y 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
to 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v5normal.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=5)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
1154/1154 (100%)| 0:02/ 0:02| 0:02/ 0:02| 14.375x| 0:00
32 [ 8] %*
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 0]
80 [ 0]
96 [ 52] %%******
112 [ 428] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%************************************************
128 [ 456] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************************************
160 [ 80] %%%*********
192 [ 75] %***********
224 [ 28] %****
256 [ 23] %***
320 [ 4] %
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
131.9 21.3 78.7 83.3 8.9 7.8
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.4dB

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>lame3995y.exe -V 0 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringi
ng.wav 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v0normal.mp3
LAME 3.99.5y 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
polyphase lowpass filter disabled
Encoding 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
to 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v0normal.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=0)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
1154/1154 (100%)| 0:02/ 0:02| 0:02/ 0:02| 11.376x| 0:00
32 [ 0]
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 0]
80 [ 0]
96 [ 0]
112 [ 0]
128 [ 5] %
160 [ 5] %
192 [ 55] %%%%%%%%%
224 [ 327] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%*******
256 [ 436] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%********************
320 [ 326] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
261.0 75.7 24.3 83.3 8.9 7.8
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.4dB

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>lame3995y.exe -V 0+ 05___Angels_Fall_First_ring
ing.wav 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v0plus.mp3
LAME 3.99.5y 32bits (http://lame.sf.net)
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 17249 Hz - 17782 Hz
Encoding 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav
to 05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v0plus.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=0)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
1154/1154 (100%)| 0:04/ 0:04| 0:04/ 0:04| 7.3687x| 0:00
32 [ 0]
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 0]
80 [ 0]
96 [ 0]
112 [ 0]
128 [ 0]
160 [ 0]
192 [ 0]
224 [ 3] %
256 [ 139] %%%%%%%%**
320 [1012] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%*****************
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
312.0 75.6 24.4 83.3 8.9 7.8
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.4dB

C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>


This post has been edited by Dynamic: Sep 8 2012, 17:30
Attached File(s)
Attached File  05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.wav.v5plus.mp3 ( 695.1K ) Number of downloads: 98
 


--------------------
Dynamic the artist formerly known as DickD
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 8 2012, 18:28
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



QUOTE (alter4 @ Sep 8 2012, 12:14) *
I did ABX -V0 very easily ...

Sure I beleive you. But can you please try 3.99.5y -V0+? It would be great for me to know whether I have to work on it yet or whether I'm done. (To me the result is fine, but that's the case already with original -V0).


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 8 2012, 18:54
Post #30





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



QUOTE (Dynamic @ Sep 8 2012, 18:29) *
That's weird. ...

You're right, and the weirdness is definitely on my side. Sorry for the confusion.
I'm a bit upset about the version I uploaded which definitely doesn't work the way I intended (though it seems to have its advantages) and is not identical with my development version.
I'll try to find out about the problem. Sorry again.

Anyway, your finding shows that making Lame more defensive makes sense also with lower settings than -V0+. Thanks for that. I'll go back to work.


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 8 2012, 20:02
Post #31





Group: Members
Posts: 819
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



QUOTE (halb27 @ Sep 8 2012, 18:54) *
Anyway, your finding shows that making Lame more defensive makes sense also with lower settings than -V0+. Thanks for that. I'll go back to work.


Although I don't think I'm as good as you at ABXing, I'm impressed with what this version fixes personally, and to me, it seems to confirm the feeling that the pitch variations coincided with the picking transients, as changing only the short block encoding to maximum (or I presume just that change) solved it.

The 0.9 to 1.9 second range also sounds great to me at -V 6.3+ (about as 'low quality' as lame can go without invoking resampling to 32 kHz sampling rate), though it's also around 180 kbps and perhaps the lower lowpass is devoting more bits to encoding the passband accurately. I couldn't hear any pitch variation on -V6.3+ and while I thought I heard a slight difference in the upper frequencies to focus on, I couldn't ABX it (4/7 before I gave up). Incidentally, at -V6.3+ it allows slightly more long blocks (84.4% vs 83.3%), but the problem is still solved to my ears on that specific one-second part of this sample, though I guess, being a short-block problem, having more long blocks might actually help tonal encoding and it might have made some of the transients more pre-echoey or smeared, which I don't think I'm good at picking up. The transient detection might be marginally affected by the lowpass nearing 16 kHz at -V6.3+
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 8 2012, 20:33
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



Thanks for that. Hopefully you will continue your valuable testing with my next regular version.
Unfortunately your version is just a premature version of 3.99.5y (with welcome side effects in this very context), and I am not able to reconstruct the internal details of this very version. Which is not as bad as it sounds, as I know about the potential ingredients. The correct version BTW can be downloaded from the 3.99.5y thread now.

One thing however is pretty sure right now: In order to have my extension improve things with problem cases like these, a relatively large increase in average bitrate is necessary for the low quality settings. According to first trials last night this makes sense to me according to the fact that usually everything is encoded fine even with a quality setting like -V5. With problem cases like this increasing quality level helps only in a way that is a bit disappointing. Increasing average bitrate with the defensive details of the functional extension seems to have a more stringent effect. Which is to be shown yet, resp. the exact details have to be worked out.

This post has been edited by halb27: Sep 8 2012, 20:35


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 9 2012, 10:04
Post #33





Group: Members
Posts: 819
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



QUOTE (halb27 @ Sep 8 2012, 20:33) *
One thing however is pretty sure right now: In order to have my extension improve things with problem cases like these, a relatively large increase in average bitrate is necessary for the low quality settings. According to first trials last night this makes sense to me according to the fact that usually everything is encoded fine even with a quality setting like -V5.


I'm keen to keep testing, so long as I have the time, which is a little sporadic at the moment. At least I'm familiar with what to listen for in this sample and I might give some like eig and herding-calls a go too.

I guess with about 83% of the files being long blocks and -V5 normally being about 130 kbps, and using about 480kbps for those short and switching blocks (320 + 50% of 320), a rough figure would be roughly 0.83 * 130 kbps + (1-0.83) * 480kbps = 190 kbps (7% - 10% short blocks respectively) after mp3packer. Perhaps that's a slight overestimate based on my actual results, so maybe it's not right up to 480 kbps on all short block or on the switching blocks.

I suppose that's still better than going to -V2 and still having an artifact, albeit more subtle when you've identified the problem sample. I guess it's possible to have a -V n- mode that employs somewhat lower short-block minimum bitrate or a lesser increase in the requested Signal To Mask Ratio (or quantization error). Hmm. Maybe my "volume of soil to cover seeds" analogy isn't so far off in numerical proportions.

I guess we could say that compared to -V5 with artifact,
-V0+ requires about 150-180 kbps of bitrate increase in this specific case, but sounds perfect
-V0 requires about 130 kbps of bitrate increase but sounds near enough OK, maybe a subtle artifact
-V2 requires about 50-60 kbps of bitrate increase and still has an artifact, slightly less than -V5
-V5+ requires about 40-55 kbps of bitrate increase but sounds essentially perfect (to my limited ears).
-V6.3+ also requires 40-55 kbps of bitrate increase (i.e. little to no bitrate advantage) and sounds fine to my ears

I wonder if I might be able to think of a reasonably efficient algorithm and threshold to detect tonal components within short blocks (if that is indeed the problem with this class of artifacts), perhaps by comparing samples like this to samples with spectrally-white transients like the Dave Matthews Band sample 4_40_30sec or whatever it's called and perhaps version 3.97 to version 3.99 in samples where they differ in this sort of artifact.

I remember some years ago (3.90.2 era, perhaps) playing with lamex (I think that was the name) which produced graphs of the waveforms and spectrum of original and reconstructed signals. I don't know if there's still a compile switch to create a lamex based on 3.99.5x or y. I don't tend to look as I haven't had a C compiler installed in years.

I'd have thought there might be an algorithmic way to pick something out and set an appropriate detection threshold for maximizing bitrate in this sort of sample but not in more normal atonal short block transients. This would probably greatly reduce the bitrate increase (after running mp3packer or implementing a method of building up maximum bit reservoir within LAME only where it's about to be needed).

-V5+ plus short-block tonality threshold might (guesswork) require anything between 10 and 30 kbps more bitrate, perhaps 5-20 kbps on a whole collection (after mp3packer or backward bit-reservoir accumulation)

Or, more sophisticated than a threshold to request maximum bitrate, setting a better fitting function rule for requesting a progressively lower quantization noise (or SMR) as some measure of relative tonality increases, either using the existing analysis functions such as FFTs used by the psymodel or maybe comparing additional FFTs of various lengths (which could be active only during the analysis of short blocks, limiting the encode-speed reduction). A potential problem with relying on the internal short-block detection and switching before even looking for tonality would be if in future versions of LAME, the detection threshold were modified, breaking any change we make to solve this sort of problem or unmasking some edge-cases.

I expect I could generate some artificial test tone + transient samples or mix a pair of percussive and tonal tracks over a range of relative loudnesses in some sort of Design Of Experiments style to try to plot out where the limits of audibility lie.

Thanks again for the time and effort you put in, Horst.

Ryan.


--------------------
Dynamic the artist formerly known as DickD
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
alter4
post Sep 9 2012, 11:14
Post #34





Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 14-September 04
From: Belarus, Vitebsk
Member No.: 16992



Guys, just one question. What is LAME3.99y encoder and when I can download it?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 9 2012, 13:30
Post #35





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



You can download it from the 3.99.5y thread.

Thanks for wanting to give it a try.


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 10 2012, 17:34
Post #36





Group: Members
Posts: 819
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



QUOTE (halb27 @ Sep 9 2012, 13:30) *
You can download it from the 3.99.5y thread.

Thanks for wanting to give it a try.


I decided out of interest that I'd try a different high performance MP3 encoder on this sample, and one that I've used before (when I didn't care about gapless features that LAME provides).

I encoded using Helix VBR at around 131 kbps, using settings -X2 -U2 -V60 which are the same settings used in the 128 kbps MP3 public listening test where it tied with LAME. The resulting encode is attached to this message.

I started out easily, but my tiredness set in and I lost concentration getting it wrong twice in a row. I carried on to 10 tests with renewed focus, getting all the rest correct, and I'm convinced I could genuinely detect the same sort of wavering I ABXed with lame -V 5 above, but which was fixed using lame 3.99.5y -V 5+ above

I'm not sure whether LAME or Helix is better or worse on this sample and I'm not that bothered.

I note that there is a short-block threshold switch in Helix, but not something specific to increase bitrate in short blocks, so it's unlikely that any commandline tweaks would fix it - except by using long blocks, which would mess up the picking transients (and not from the full help either).

Encoder details and options, followed by ABX log:
CODE
//* Encoder details: *//
C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>"C:\Program Files\HelixMP3Enc\hmp3.exe"

file-file MPEG Layer III audio encode v5.1 2005.08.09
Copyright 1995-2005 RealNetworks, Inc.

Usage: mp3enc <input> <output> [options]
<input> and/or <output> can be "-", which means stdin/stdout.

Example:
mp3enc input.wav output.mp3

Options:
-Nnsbstereo -Sfilter_select -Aalgor_select
-C -X -O
-D -Qquick -Ffreq_limit -Ucpu_select -TXtest1
-SBTshort_block_threshold -EC
-h (detailed help)



<press any key to stop encoder>
PCM input file: TEST.WAV
MPEG ouput file: TEST.MP3
CANNOT_OPEN_INPUT_FILE
C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals>

//* ABX LOG *//
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2012/09/10 16:57:13

File A: C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals\05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.helix.x2.u2.v60 .mp3
File B: C:\Users\Ryan\Music\Test signals\05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.flac

16:57:13 : Test started.
16:57:21 : Trial reset.
16:58:25 : 01/01 50.0%
16:58:45 : 02/02 25.0%
16:59:17 : 03/03 12.5%
16:59:29 : 04/04 6.3%
17:00:28 : 05/05 3.1%
17:01:00 : 06/06 1.6%
17:01:15 : 06/07 6.3%
17:02:19 : 06/08 14.5%
17:03:35 : 07/09 9.0%
17:04:07 : 08/10 5.5%
17:04:22 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/10 (5.5%)

Attached File(s)
Attached File  05___Angels_Fall_First_ringing.helix.x2.u2.v60_.mp3 ( 471.43K ) Number of downloads: 90
 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 10 2012, 22:16
Post #37





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



Here comes a candidate for 3.99.5z to play with. The zip file also contains some problematic music I used for testing.

You can use -Vn+ from n=5 to n=0. It is impossible for the lower quality settings to bring significant improvement for problem spots without also significantly increasing average bitrate. So the adequate -Vn partners to compare with are
-V3 for -V5+ (169 kbps for my test set)
-V2 for -V4+ (190 kbps)
-V1 for -V3+ (223 kbps).

-V2+ takes 235 kbps on average,
-V1+ 243 kbps (after mp3packer, 250 kbps otherwise).
-V0+ comes more or less for free: 262 kbps after mp3packer, 271 kbps otherwise (-V0 takes 260 kbps for my test set used).

I did some intensive listening tests with -V5+ compared to -V3. To me -V5+ is the better solution for ringing/tremolo problems like 'Angel Fall First', 'lead-voice', 'trumpet_myPrince'.
For the other samples I tested there isn't a big quality difference between -V5+ and -V3, with slight advantages for -V5+ for some samples, and slight advantages for -V3 for other ones.

If you want to play with the most essential parameters that control the functional extension of 3.99.5z you can use
--adbr_long x to set the minimum audio data bitrate for long blocks to x [kbps]
--adbr_short x to set the minimum audio data bitrate for short blocks to x [kbps].

Enjoy!

This post has been edited by halb27: Sep 10 2012, 22:20


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Sep 11 2012, 08:40
Post #38





Group: Members
Posts: 819
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



Thanks, I look forward to testing this.

Ryan.

[edit - for anyone else testing, you might need the vcredist_x86.exe to install Microsoft Visual C 10 runtime libraries that were bundled with at least one previous version of lame3.99.5y and are available from Microsoft if you haven't installed them already on your system]

This post has been edited by Dynamic: Sep 11 2012, 09:04


--------------------
Dynamic the artist formerly known as DickD
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 11 2012, 09:09
Post #39





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



I'd like to draw special attention to the sample 'trumpet_myPrince' included in the zip file.
The ringing/tremolo problem (for instance within the first 2 seconds) is much more severe than with 'Angel Fall First', and with -V5+ or -V3 it's still pretty obvious (just less annoying with -V5+).
('lead-voice' is even more severe, but it's artificial, whereas 'trumpet_myPrince' is natural music).

Thinking of user's intention:

a) Group 1: People who are content with -V5 or similar, because usually everything is fine with such a setting. These people don't have any need for quality levels higher than -V5 or -V4. Especially there's no need for a -Vn+ for them.

b) Group 2: People who don't have demands for overall close-to-transparency, but who do not like to have obvious or annoying problematic spots in their music even when they are rare. That's the people who use -V3 or -V2 traditionally. The lower quality -Vn+ settings are a promising alternative IMO. 'trumpet_myPrince' is a good sample IMO for testing the setting under consideration whether it fulfills the quality targets of this group. With this in mind I think a higher quality setting than -V5+ or -V3 is necessary. Important question to me: What should be the lowest quality setting which makes -Vn+ useful for this group? -V4+? -V3+?. I'd like to start -Vn+ with this setting.

c) Group 3: People who demand for overall transparency or close-to-transparency. -V0 or -V1 are the traditional VBR settings for this group. The highest -Vn+ settings are the alternative, with -V0+ as the most interesting cadidate.

This post has been edited by halb27: Sep 11 2012, 09:47


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Sep 11 2012, 09:23
Post #40





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



QUOTE (Dynamic @ Sep 11 2012, 09:40) *
... you might need the vcredist_x86.exe ...

It's included in the zip file now. Thank's for the hint, Dynamic.


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: 19th September 2014 - 04:08