IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Final Settings Prior To Encoding Collection, [moved from CD Hardware/Software]
essentialjpm
post Jul 12 2013, 20:09
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-July 13
Member No.: 109083



I have an old account but I haven't posted in a long time, can't remember the email I registered with so I started this account. Anyway, I've ripped my CD collection several times (once at 128kbps, then again at 192kbps, then again at v0) each time with Easy CD-DA Extractor. Didn't always rip all at once, but the settings were pretty much the same till I changed so many CDs could have been ripped with different LAME versions as well.

Anyway, I'm sticking with v0 and I'm ready to re-do the entire collection at the same time with the same LAME version and settings. I don't want to be kicking myself again in a few years so I wouldn't mind a few opinions before I do everything and realize I did something incorrectly again in a few years.

After reading this forum a lot, the Exact Audio Copy wiki, and general Google searches, this is my final:

Software: Exact Audio Copy (0.99 Prebeta 4)

LAME: 3.98.4-vc6

Command Line: -V 0 --id3v2-only --ta "%a" --tl "%g" --tn "%n" --tt "%t" --ty "%y" --tg "%m" --tc "rbm (eac secure mode)" %s %d

I'm looking for the highest quality v0, rip time doesn't matter. From my reading this is the best command line I can get, am I missing anything?

Also, it seems like LAME 3.98.4 is highly recommended, is there a different version I should be using?

Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 12 2013, 20:16
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (essentialjpm @ Jul 12 2013, 20:09) *
I'm looking for the highest quality v0, rip time doesn't matter. From my reading this is the best command line I can get, am I missing anything?
Yes, plain -V0 is the best idea for encoding VBR. Any other switches are not likely to increase quality appreciably and might even degrade it.

QUOTE
Also, it seems like LAME 3.98.4 is highly recommended, is there a different version I should be using?
You could start by not using a version that’s over 3 years old! I’m not aware of any good reason to use anything but the latest version, 3.99.5. I generally presume the developers know what they’re doing and therefore that later versions are better. Otherwise they wouldn’t release them.

Also, since this is specific to LAME and not EAC, it belongs in MP3 and not CD Hardware/Software. EAC is tangential in cases like this.

This post has been edited by db1989: Jul 12 2013, 20:17
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
essentialjpm
post Jul 12 2013, 21:18
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-July 13
Member No.: 109083



QUOTE (db1989 @ Jul 12 2013, 15:16) *
QUOTE (essentialjpm @ Jul 12 2013, 20:09) *
I'm looking for the highest quality v0, rip time doesn't matter. From my reading this is the best command line I can get, am I missing anything?
Yes, plain -V0 is the best idea for encoding VBR. Any other switches are not likely to increase quality appreciably and might even degrade it.

QUOTE
Also, it seems like LAME 3.98.4 is highly recommended, is there a different version I should be using?
You could start by not using a version that’s over 3 years old! I’m not aware of any good reason to use anything but the latest version, 3.99.5. I generally presume the developers know what they’re doing and therefore that later versions are better. Otherwise they wouldn’t release them.

Also, since this is specific to LAME and not EAC, it belongs in MP3 and not CD Hardware/Software. EAC is tangential in cases like this.


Sounds good, I'll go with the newest LAME, I just read a lot, there seemed to be personal preference all over the place for a lot of older versions. I saw 3.98.4 referenced a lot, good point though.

Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Apesbrain
post Jul 12 2013, 23:14
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 490
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 10915



You're ripping your CD collection for the 4th time; why don't you rip to FLAC and be done with it? As far as EAC is concerned, it's not any more difficult/time-consuming. First, get the newest EAC; there's no reason to be using an old version. You may want to use the newest FLAC encoder. Install EAC first then copy the new FLAC.EXE over the copy in the EAC folder.

Whatever lossy formats you may need later (MP3/AAC/WMA/OGG) can easily and quickly be generated from the FLACs.

I can only say this to you because I re-ripped my entire CD collection three times before I figured this out.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eli
post Jul 13 2013, 00:23
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1056
Joined: 16-October 03
Member No.: 9337



I would echo the recommendation for FLAC. Its lossless, and once you have a lossless archive you can easily transcode to whatever lossy format you want.

Personally, I would recommend you check out dBpoweramp. I think its tagging features are much more robust then EAC's.

If you do use EAC, use the newest version. It has significant improvements and supports CTDB.


--------------------
http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?t=21072
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
slks
post Jul 13 2013, 10:54
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 31-March 06
From: Houston, Texas
Member No.: 29046



Rip to FLAC first, then encode with any version of LAME you'd like - including future versions in future years - and never have to re-rip in this lifetime.

As for settings, -V 0 is all you need. The -V settings have been heavily optimized and tweaked over many years. The work of figuring out how to design an encoder to use bits most efficiently, has already been done by the encoder's developers. In earlier times, with less mature (or just bad) software, there might have been advantages to forcing the encoder to abide by certain restrictions in the form of command-line arguments. LAME has been developed to such a high degree that this is unnecessary.

One thing that might be worth checking out, though, is the "functional extension" of LAME that I've seen mentioned on these very boards. I don't remember what it was called, but it made some modifications to the higher bit rate VBR mode so that it would be more liberal with handing out 320 kbs frames, which can improve how the encoder handles problematic samples. My technical description of it may be off, but perhaps someone can find the thread.


--------------------
http://www.last.fm/user/sls/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aleron Ives
post Jul 13 2013, 21:29
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 189
Joined: 22-March 10
From: California
Member No.: 79208



LAME 3.100k is the current version of halb27's extension, but as has been discussed before, it is inadvisable to recommend LAME offshoots to people who have yet to demonstrate through ABX tests that standard V0 fails to meet their quality requirements.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=101150
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 14 2013, 11:02
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (Aleron Ives @ Jul 13 2013, 21:29) *
but as has been discussed before, it is inadvisable to recommend LAME offshoots to people who have yet to demonstrate through ABX tests that standard V0 fails to meet their quality requirements.
Thank you! I will add that -V0 might well be excessive too, but I can see why you used it as your reference-point in this case.

QUOTE (slks @ Jul 13 2013, 10:54) *
One thing that might be worth checking out, though, is the "functional extension" of LAME that I've seen mentioned on these very boards. I don't remember what it was called, but it made some modifications to the higher bit rate VBR mode so that it would be more liberal with handing out 320 kbs frames, which can improve how the encoder handles problematic samples.
I think your understanding is roughly correct. It also offers the user the ability to set the minimal size of frame used by VBR. If you ask me, both of these are likely to lead, in the minds of users who do not fully grasp the concepts yet, to even more confusion about how VBR actually works and how relevant the bitrate is (hint: not very) in this mode.

My advice, especially to new users, it just to use standard LAME and presume wisely that its developers know fine well what they are doing, unless you have a particular psychoacoustic system that is specifically sensitive to the equally specific issues on which halb27 spends so much time and tests so many isolated samples of unusual timbres rather than representative sections of real music.

This post has been edited by db1989: Jul 14 2013, 11:03
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
essentialjpm
post Sep 12 2013, 02:36
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-July 13
Member No.: 109083



After several recommending it in this topic, I bought dbpoweramp. I like it so far, two questions before I go further with ripping.

1) I'm going to rip everything vbr 0 (mp3 lame) ... I selected "Slow (High Quality)" and then under advanced there is an "Additional CLI" is there anything else I should add or is their default optimal? Any options I should change that I might have missed?

2) I'm also going to rip to FLAC as several suggested, the v0 are for my iPhone, the FLAC will be backups in case I ever need to convert again. I've never done FLAC, under the options there are Lossless 0-8 then Lossless Uncompressed. I'm assuming I should be doing uncompressed I just wanted to verify?

Thanks for everything.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Sep 12 2013, 02:43
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 1093
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



Why why why are you converting to MP3 if you have an iOS device to play the files? Convert to ALAC for archival then transcode to AAC for portable/temporary use.


--------------------
/1CcSkg3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Sep 12 2013, 02:43
Post #11





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (essentialjpm @ Sep 12 2013, 02:36) *
1) I'm going to rip everything vbr 0 (mp3 lame) ... I selected "Slow (High Quality)" and then under advanced there is an "Additional CLI" is there anything else I should add or is their default optimal? Any options I should change that I might have missed?
No, the defaults are recommended, hence why the developers made them the defaults. Even -q should be left at its default for normal use; the supposedly higher settings are not proven to be better/worthwhile.

QUOTE
2) I'm also going to rip to FLAC as several suggested, the v0 are for my iPhone, the FLAC will be backups in case I ever need to convert again. I've never done FLAC, under the options there are Lossless 0-8 then Lossless Uncompressed. I'm assuming I should be doing uncompressed I just wanted to verify?
No, not at all. Why else would it be called lossless compression? The uncompressed variant is presumably provided for some edge cases, but almost no one uses it, because the main reason to use a lossless compressor is so that, well, your audio gets compressed. The numbered options only change the balance of compression against encoding time, not the audio at all, hence the other word, lossless.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tpijag
post Sep 12 2013, 02:44
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 2352
Joined: 19-May 08
Member No.: 53637



2. Lossless is lossless so what level of compression you choose makes zero difference to quality. It does make a difference is file size and can make quite a difference to how long the process takes.

Do a couple of test runs and see what works for you. Many people here have expressed the idea that compression level 5 is a good mix for saving some disk space without too much of a time hit. YMMV
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
essentialjpm
post Sep 12 2013, 03:03
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 12-July 13
Member No.: 109083



QUOTE (db1989 @ Sep 11 2013, 21:43) *
No, not at all. Why else would it be called lossless compression? The uncompressed variant is presumably provided for some edge cases, but almost no one uses it, because the main reason to use a lossless compressor is so that, well, your audio gets compressed. The numbered options only change the balance of compression against encoding time, not the audio at all, hence the other word, lossless.


As I said I've never ventured in to FLAC before, I thought it was uncompressed so I was unsure why there were options like VBR (0-8). That makes sense though, thank you.

QUOTE (tpijag @ Sep 11 2013, 21:44) *
2. Lossless is lossless so what level of compression you choose makes zero difference to quality. It does make a difference is file size and can make quite a difference to how long the process takes.

Do a couple of test runs and see what works for you. Many people here have expressed the idea that compression level 5 is a good mix for saving some disk space without too much of a time hit. YMMV


I will do that, I see 5 is also the default in dbpoweramp but I'll do a few test runs. Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Sep 12 2013, 03:06
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 1093
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



FLAC -0 in uncompressed. Again, why won't you consider ALAC/AAC?


--------------------
/1CcSkg3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gib
post Sep 12 2013, 06:07
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 227
Joined: 20-January 03
From: A Tropical Isle
Member No.: 4640



QUOTE (essentialjpm @ Sep 11 2013, 16:03) *
I will do that, I see 5 is also the default in dbpoweramp but I'll do a few test runs. Thanks.

As long as your computer is moderately recent, FLAC encoding is pretty fast. Most of the time there's little reason to use anything but level 8.

As for your plan to use LAME V0, since an iPhone has a limited, non-upgradeable, amount of space, you might want to try other V settings to maximize use of available storage. You've probably already considered that, but I thought I'd mention it anyway while I'm posting. heh
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 12 2013, 06:33
Post #16





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10009
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (eahm @ Sep 11 2013, 19:06) *
FLAC -0 in uncompressed.

Where did you get this idea? It certainly isn't true.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Sep 12 2013, 06:51
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 1093
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



Wow, I totally confused level 0 with uncompressed (http://xiph.org/flac/documentation_tools_f...ncoding_options proves me wrong as well).

This post has been edited by eahm: Sep 12 2013, 06:57


--------------------
/1CcSkg3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mach-X
post Sep 12 2013, 07:12
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 273
Joined: 29-July 12
From: Windsor, On, Ca
Member No.: 101859



There is no such thing as 'uncompressed' flac. It is a lossless form of compression similar to a zip file. Level 0 is larger file size/faster encoding. -8 is smallest file size/slowest encoding. However modern cpus with more than one core will encode even -8 far faster than your cd drive can physically read the disc, which is why I always use it (Why waste space if there's no benefit?). You can expand flac back to its original wav state, burn it to audio cd and it will always be the same, no loss in sound quality, again just like a zip file.

If the space on your iphone isn't an issue, -V0 is just fine if you aren't interested in doing abx testing to identify your transparency threshold, and you simply want that 'insurance' that you aren't losing sound quality. If space becomes an issue later on, consider doing some testing.

Also, since I am unfamiliar with dbpoweramp, does it do accuraterip checking to make sure your cdrip has been, well, accurately ripped? If not I won't sick the EAC brigade on you, but simply suggest you grab the free software cuetools, and check your ripped albums to make sure there are no errors.

This post has been edited by Mach-X: Sep 12 2013, 07:14
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Sep 12 2013, 07:24
Post #19





Group: Members
Posts: 1093
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



Mach-X, thanks for the lesson about lossless compression, now take a look at this screenshot:



...I'd actually like to know how to do that with a command and/or with foobar2000.

Regarding MP3, even V2 is "just fine". I still don't understand why he doesn't go AAC.

This post has been edited by eahm: Sep 12 2013, 07:28


--------------------
/1CcSkg3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mach-X
post Sep 12 2013, 07:45
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 273
Joined: 29-July 12
From: Windsor, On, Ca
Member No.: 101859



Any idea what commandline switch that is? Never heard of such a thing, nor is there any mention of it in the FLAC documentation.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JJZolx
post Sep 12 2013, 08:04
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 396
Joined: 26-November 04
Member No.: 18345



--disable-constant-subframes --disable-fixed-subframes --max-lpc-order=0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
marc2003
post Sep 12 2013, 08:07
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 4475
Joined: 27-January 05
From: England
Member No.: 19379



QUOTE (Mach-X @ Sep 12 2013, 07:12) *
Also, since I am unfamiliar with dbpoweramp, does it do accuraterip checking to make sure your cdrip has been, well, accurately ripped? If not I won't sick the EAC brigade on you, but simply suggest you grab the free software cuetools, and check your ripped albums to make sure there are no errors.


accuraterip and dbpoweramp were both created and are maintained by the same person. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showuser=1615


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Sep 12 2013, 13:13
Post #23





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



Uncompressed FLAC is a dubious extension pioneered by dBpowerAMP. You can search for it, but naturally, you will stumble across a load of crap from people who think lossless compression somehow damages sound quality, despite it putting out exactly the same bits by definition. So maybe save your energy.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
spoon
post Sep 12 2013, 14:49
Post #24


dBpowerAMP developer


Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 2749
Joined: 24-March 02
Member No.: 1615



We let people decide on their own, I keep an open mind. A segment of the market had a need for an uncompressed lossless codec without tagging limitations, we gave people what they were asking for.

Here is a typical reply we give about its virtues:

http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php...ll=1#post136096

QUOTE
Some people are sure they can hear a difference, others are sure they cannot. Lossless is lossless, that is all the modes decode to the exact same audio, however the difference is the amount of CPU time required for each, depending on player (such as modern PC) it could be very little cpu for both, or more significant for embedded players.




--------------------
Spoon http://www.dbpoweramp.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rick.hughes
post Sep 12 2013, 15:03
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 126
Joined: 16-February 07
Member No.: 40679



QUOTE (essentialjpm @ Sep 11 2013, 20:36) *
After several recommending it in this topic, I bought dbpoweramp. I like it so far, two questions before I go further with ripping.

1) I'm going to rip everything vbr 0 (mp3 lame) ... I selected "Slow (High Quality)" and then under advanced there is an "Additional CLI" is there anything else I should add or is their default optimal? Any options I should change that I might have missed?

2) I'm also going to rip to FLAC as several suggested, the v0 are for my iPhone, the FLAC will be backups in case I ever need to convert again. I've never done FLAC, under the options there are Lossless 0-8 then Lossless Uncompressed. I'm assuming I should be doing uncompressed I just wanted to verify?

Thanks for everything.

Don't rip twice. Just rip to lossless (FLAC or ALAC) and then batch encode those to lossy (MP3 or AAC).
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: 2nd October 2014 - 02:37