IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
320 kps MP3 or --quality 7 --xlevel MPC ?, Chosing betw. MP3 & MPC
Diam0nd
post Nov 4 2003, 21:49
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 4-November 03
Member No.: 9655



Hi, PEOPLE. I'm new in MPC & I need some help. The thing is that I RIP a lot of CD's, usually with LAME bitrate 320. 320 BECAUSE I'm after QUALITY. The high, the better. Is it true that MPC is better then MP3? Much better? I mean is it worth it RIP'ping with MPC?

Another 1 smile.gif Will I get higher quality using -quality 10 --xlevel instead of -quality 7 --xlevel ?

Thanks a lot FOR answers smile.gif

P.$. Are you happy now, Mr. Jay? wink.gif

This post has been edited by Diam0nd: Nov 4 2003, 22:39


--------------------
TerraTec DMX 6fire 24/96 S0UNDC@RD
Technics DJ1210 HE@DPH0NE$
Creative Zen 20GB MP3 PL@YER
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
novocane
post Nov 4 2003, 22:00
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 39
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 22



MPC is better than mp3 at high bitrates . using that setting -q7 you will get transparent quality in almost all music you want to encode , I donīt say at 100% because nothing is 100% secure smile.gif . also you will need less disk space using mpc at -q7 than using mp3@320 kb/s
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sthayashi
post Nov 4 2003, 22:02
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 494
Joined: 16-April 03
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Member No.: 5997



You would get higher quality by using either Monkey Audio or FLAC. Alternatively, you'll also get impressively high quality by using WavPack Hybrid or OptimFrog DualStream

MPC --quality 10 --xlevel is the highest quality level there is. But to give you a hint, MPC --quality 7 is also MPC --insane.
MPC --quality 8 is also MPC --braindead.

They chose those names for a reason.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jan S.
post Nov 4 2003, 22:03
Post #4





Group: Admin
Posts: 2550
Joined: 26-September 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 21



Diam0nd:

QUOTE
10. All posts must be in english

A non-English post is anti-social as it excludes a large section of the forum members from the ongoing discussion. Do not use so called elite or "1337" speak as it makes your post harder to read and unreadable for some forum members. Do not use uncommen abbreviations as it can make it impossible for some forum members to understand what you wrote.

Explanation: Such posts degrade the quality of the forum since many other users can't understand their content and could therefore be considered SPAM.


Edit: TOS #10 discussion split here.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
p0wder
post Nov 4 2003, 23:05
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 347
Joined: 22-July 02
From: USA
Member No.: 2721



If quality is what you're after, then use Musepack. You'll start getting diminishing returns after --standard.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pike84
post Nov 5 2003, 20:02
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 7590



Just try mpc Q5 and if you can't tell it from the original, stick with that one. Somehow I'm guessing though, that your case is more of a psychological sort, so perhaps I should suggest lossless for you instead rolleyes.gif?

This post has been edited by Pike84: Nov 5 2003, 20:04


--------------------
XMPlay rocks! www.un4seen.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
phong
post Nov 6 2003, 04:50
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 346
Joined: 7-July 03
From: 15 & Ryan
Member No.: 7619



I'll be so bold as to say mpc --standard will generally beat lame --preset insane. Just take a look at the known problem samples for those settings, both the number of problem samples as well as the severity.


--------------------
I am *expanding!* It is so much *squishy* to *smell* you! *Campers* are the best! I have *anticipation* and then what? Better parties in *the middle* for sure.
http://www.phong.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Nov 12 2003, 10:22
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 873
Joined: 12-October 01
From: the great wide open
Member No.: 277



320 kps MP3 or --quality 7 --xlevel MPC ?








simple answer:

mpc @ q7 (about 220 kbit) offers better sound quality than mp3@320, near to perfect, archive quality, great bitrate saver compared to lossless = 600 - 900 kbit/s depends on music,( loud or silent, classic or other),
mp3 @ 320 needs way more space, and has less quality than mpc at q7.

This post has been edited by user: Nov 12 2003, 10:23


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lucpes
post Nov 12 2003, 10:32
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 517
Joined: 9-October 01
Member No.: 254



mpc --insane (quality 7) will be more than enough for 99.9999% of the music out there. Anything above that is a waste of space.

Even 7 is overkill, however there were a couple of samples that could be ABX'ed at q5 & q6 but not at q7.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Nov 12 2003, 10:39
Post #10





Group: Developer
Posts: 1679
Joined: 23-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 731



I dare to say that even --quality 5 will be higher quality than 320kbps MP3 (LAME) in most (all?) cases at about half the size. --quality 7 is for the paranoid like me.

dev0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nite
post Aug 22 2004, 00:37
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 1-January 04
From: Halifax N.S.
Member No.: 10849



Some may suggest that I waste HD space needlessly, or call me paranoid - but I encode using Q10.

Recently I lost a 1500 song library encoded in Q7. After replacing my dead drive with 120GB, I began the lengthy task of encoding all over again. With so much extra HD space available, why not go with the Q8 Braindead setting. Everything sounded great, untill I decided to experiment with the EAC software. By mistake entered a value of Q10 (I thought this was braindead). After realizing the error I decided to compare a few music samples. I can't tell you why my ears are sensitive enough to pick up transient information but maybe its more audible in Q10. - I really can hear the difference even at these bitrates.

My suggestion to you is - ABX some samples for yourself. I prefer to listen to mostly jazz and classical acoustic recordings. I find instumentation and vocals contained in well produced jazz (without overproduction) will yield quality which is more decernable at these quality levels.

If you can hear the difference yourself, then I would say that there is no shame in being a fortunate minority.

Happy encoding in Quality 10 - MPC still rules the pack!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
westgroveg
post Aug 22 2004, 00:57
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 1236
Joined: 5-October 01
Member No.: 220



Diam0nd, itís very rare to find artifacts on 256kbps mp3ís & even you can hear differences believe me they are very slight. 320kbps using LAME, just try the worst problem samples (worst case scenarios which are usually less than a second & rare) you will be lucky to hear any difference.

If you have good hearing & quality equipment you may even find MPC has a very slight HF & LF boost too (just a personal opinion) but what is for sure, no lossy is perfect.

I would use mp3 because of compatibility, that & itís size is the lure of lossy for me.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pio2001
post Aug 22 2004, 01:17
Post #13


Moderator


Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3936
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 73



Guys, this thread is more than 9 monthes old !
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjoonlee
post Aug 22 2004, 02:12
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 2526
Joined: 25-July 02
From: South Korea
Member No.: 2782



I somehow find it odd that nobody has mentioned ABXing in this thread for "9 months."

If you can't hear a difference and have to ask others, what's the point in asking which is better?

This post has been edited by kjoonlee: Aug 22 2004, 02:13


--------------------
http://blacksun.ivyro.net/vorbis/vorbisfaq.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
westgroveg
post Aug 22 2004, 02:19
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 1236
Joined: 5-October 01
Member No.: 220



QUOTE (kjoonlee @ Aug 22 2004, 01:12 PM)
I somehow find it odd that nobody has mentioned ABXing in this thread for "9 months."

If you can't hear a difference and have to ask others, what's the point in asking which is better?
*

Both nite & I mentioned ABX, try problem samples.

QUOTE
Guys, this thread is more than 9 monthes old !

lol, I just saw it pop up in the portal.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjoonlee
post Aug 22 2004, 02:24
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 2526
Joined: 25-July 02
From: South Korea
Member No.: 2782



QUOTE (westgroveg @ Aug 22 2004, 10:19 AM)
QUOTE (kjoonlee @ Aug 22 2004, 01:12 PM)
I somehow find it odd that nobody has mentioned ABXing in this thread for "9 months."

If you can't hear a difference and have to ask others, what's the point in asking which is better?
*

Both nite & I mentioned ABX, try problem samples.
*

It was only mentioned today. crying.gif


--------------------
http://blacksun.ivyro.net/vorbis/vorbisfaq.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
liekloo
post Aug 22 2004, 10:15
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 456
Joined: 22-March 02
From: Belgium
Member No.: 1596



QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Aug 22 2004, 01:17 AM)
Guys, this thread is more than 9 monthes old !
*

haha! biggrin.gif


--------------------
"E S S E N T I A L" Guide for E A C :

http://users.fulladsl.be/spb2267/
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: 22nd September 2014 - 12:45