IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

-V n (in 3.95.1), Presets, bitrates and lowpass of V value
Vietwoojagig
post Jan 29 2004, 11:38
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 248
Joined: 28-November 02
From: Germany, Trier
Member No.: 3916



Hi,
CODE
Switch            equals               target  Y  b  lowpass resample
-V 0            = --preset extreme       240     128  19500
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240     128  19500
-V 1                                     210     128  19000
-V 1 --vbr-new                           210     128  19000
-V 2            = --preset standard      190     128  19000
-V 2 --vbr-new  = --preset fast standard    190     128  19000
-V 3                                     175   1      18000
-V 3 --vbr-new                           175   1      18000
-V 4            = --preset medium        165   1      18000
-V 4 --vbr-new  = --preset fast medium   165   1      18000
-V 5                                     130   1      17000
-V 5 --vbr-new                           130   1      17000
-V 6                                     115   1      16000
-V 6 --vbr-new                           115   1      16000
-V 7                                     100   1      14900   32000
-V 7 --vbr-new                           100   1      14900   32000
-V 8                                      85   1      12500   32000
-V 8 - vbr-new                            85   1      12500   32000
-V 9                                      65   1      10000   24000
-V 9 - vbr-new                            65   1      10000   24000


Questions:
1. Is it save to use the -V switches, with no corresponding preset (especially V 1 / V3)?
2. When is it more usefull, to use abr rather than -V n (e.g. --preset 120 better than -V 5)?
3. Are the displayed target average bitrates ok (+/- 10 kbps)?

Thanks

Edit: changed with Gabriel's suggestions. Added:-Y, -b, --lowpass, --resample
Edit: modified -b to fit with 3.96
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
veikko
post Feb 9 2005, 23:25
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 9-February 05
Member No.: 19719



Hi.

I just registered myself for the first time ever to a forum of anykind smile.gif

But this just seemed like a place of people who know the stuff they talk about,
and that's always good. Also this place has had by far the best attitude towards
"the new guy" making his first post, so bear with me, since this truly is my first post smile.gif

So, here's my thing, I'm in a situation now to encode all of my audio cds
to mp3 format.

By judging form the discussions here, i really should use eac or plextools
for the ripping and lame (3.90.3 or 3.96.1 if i'm correct?) for the encoding.

Even more reading of this forum has led me to the conclusion to use vbr ape
or as you would put it in the format of -V0 while using lame 3.96.1.

So the thing I would like to know is about the q value,
is there any point in adjusting it upwards trough the commandline myself?

I mean seriously, I thought about this long time, that do I even dare to ask such a question,
because I respect what Gabriel has stated about the defaults,
but I just want to know that what are the potential effects of changing
the qval to 2 or even 1 or 0. What does it really change?
Does it affect the quality of the audio in any way?
I even read about it potentially lessening the outcoming quality of the finished "product",
is that still true?

well nothing more at this point, hope this didn't strike you guys as a totally stupid question.

thanks.

This post has been edited by veikko: Feb 9 2005, 23:26
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
schonenberg
post Apr 5 2005, 08:38
Post #3





Group: Banned
Posts: 133
Joined: 28-February 05
Member No.: 20225



QUOTE (veikko @ Feb 9 2005, 04:25 PM)
Hi.

I just registered myself for the first time ever to a forum of anykind smile.gif

But this just seemed like a place of people who know the stuff they talk about,
and that's always good. Also this place has had by far the best attitude towards
"the new guy" making his first post, so bear with me, since this truly is my first post smile.gif

So, here's my thing, I'm in a situation now to encode all of my audio cds
to mp3 format.

By judging form the discussions here, i really should use eac or plextools
for the ripping and lame (3.90.3 or 3.96.1 if i'm correct?) for the encoding.

Even more reading of this forum has led me to the conclusion to use vbr ape
or as you would put it in the format of -V0 while using lame 3.96.1.

So the thing I would like to know is about the q value,
is there any point in adjusting it upwards trough the commandline myself?

I mean seriously, I thought about this long time, that do I even dare to ask such a question,
because I respect what Gabriel has stated about the defaults,
but I just want to know that what are the potential effects of changing
the qval to 2 or even 1 or 0. What does it really change?
Does it affect the quality of the audio in any way?
I even read about it potentially lessening the outcoming quality of the finished "product",
is that still true?

well nothing more at this point, hope this didn't  strike you guys as a totally stupid question.

thanks.
*



That is a valid question, one I bothered people with myself. -q 0 increases the quality of the psychoacoustic algorithm, it does not touch the bitrate at all.
In simple terms Lame will spend much more time examining each sample when encoding.

Lame 3.90.3 at --alt-preset standard is the recommended mp3 settings. Lame 3.97 final might replace 3.90.3 as the best encoder.


I use lame 3.96.1 -V 5 --athaa-sensitivity 1 -q 0, which might not improve the quality much over not using -q, but encodes fast enough for me and sounds good on my apex dvd player and my pc/stereo setup.

For cd's that I have to archive and won't have access to in the future, I use Musepack/MPC at --standard. MPC has fewer problem samples at higher bitrates and is tuned only for high transparent bitrates, but is not supported by any portables dry.gif . It is very good for computer use.

This post has been edited by schonenberg: Apr 5 2005, 08:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Vietwoojagig   -V n (in 3.95.1)   Jan 29 2004, 11:38
- - Gabriel   Nice layout. QUOTE 3. Are the displayed target av...   Jan 29 2004, 12:11
|- - moi   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Jan 29 2004, 03:11 AM)Nice l...   Feb 26 2005, 21:06
|- - Jojo   QUOTE (moi @ Feb 26 2005, 12:06 PM)To get the...   Feb 27 2005, 00:40
|- - Dologan   QUOTE (Jojo @ Feb 26 2005, 05:40 PM)use LAME ...   Mar 6 2005, 20:19
- - Dologan   Is --r3mix still remapped to -V3 --vbr-new in 3.96...   May 5 2004, 00:35
- - Gabriel   QUOTE Is --r3mix still remapped to -V3 --vbr-new i...   May 5 2004, 08:53
- - Schinkentoni   I just want to pick up the first question of Vietw...   May 5 2004, 10:05
|- - 384kbps   QUOTE (Schinkentoni @ May 5 2004, 10:05 AM)I ...   Aug 25 2004, 19:58
- - 2Bdecided   The word you're looking for is safe, not save...   May 5 2004, 11:02
- - Vietwoojagig   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ May 5 2004, 11:02 AM)The w...   May 5 2004, 11:42
- - Halcyon   Vietwoojagig, don't worry. It's just a si...   May 5 2004, 14:15
- - Dologan   QUOTE (Gabriel @ May 5 2004, 01:53 AM)QUOTE ...   May 5 2004, 15:22
- - Vietwoojagig   QUOTE (Dologan @ May 5 2004, 03:22 PM)Well, c...   May 5 2004, 15:41
- - Dologan   QUOTE (Vietwoojagig @ May 5 2004, 08:41 AM)On...   May 5 2004, 16:19
- - Vietwoojagig   QUOTE (Dologan @ May 5 2004, 04:19 PM) From w...   May 5 2004, 16:24
- - Tomb   QUOTE (Halcyon @ May 5 2004, 01:15 PM)PS It...   May 5 2004, 16:33
- - Dologan   QUOTE (Vietwoojagig @ May 5 2004, 09:24 AM)QU...   May 5 2004, 17:07
- - Gabriel   QUOTE Gabriel, could you please confirm this? Yes   May 5 2004, 17:38
- - Jebus   Wow, that is really interesting. So the --r3mix tu...   May 5 2004, 19:16
|- - GeSomeone   QUOTE (Jebus @ May 5 2004, 07:16 PM)So the --...   Aug 26 2004, 12:26
- - Squeller   QUOTE (Vietwoojagig @ Jan 29 2004, 02:38 AM)2...   May 24 2004, 12:02
- - shafff   -V2 (lame 3.95.1) gives me 141kbps on film track (...   Jun 24 2004, 18:56
- - westgroveg   Does LAME 3.96, -V2/--preset standard still use -b...   Jul 4 2004, 02:20
- - Vietwoojagig   QUOTE (westgroveg @ Jul 4 2004, 02:20 AM)Does...   Jul 7 2004, 10:29
- - Gabriel   Regarding "target bitrates" related to -...   Aug 4 2004, 08:43
- - Gabriel   -V1 is between -V0 and -V2. I do not know what to ...   Aug 26 2004, 08:30
- - Pio2001   ...so -V1 includes the alt-preset code level tunin...   Aug 26 2004, 11:11
|- - 384kbps   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Aug 26 2004, 11:11 AM)...so ...   Sep 1 2004, 06:45
|- - LoFiYo   QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Aug 26 2004, 06:11 AM)...so ...   Sep 30 2004, 04:15
- - Gabriel   QUOTE (LoFiYo @ Sep 30 2004, 05:15 AM)I thoug...   Sep 30 2004, 11:22
- - detokaal   Would it be possible to add the -q switch to the t...   Oct 18 2004, 21:30
- - Gabriel   QUOTE I believe --preset standard is -q 2 whereas ...   Oct 19 2004, 09:56
- - detokaal   Rather than ask again - I just checked myself. --...   Oct 19 2004, 22:02
|- - freakngoat   QUOTE (detokaal @ Oct 19 2004, 09:02 PM)Rathe...   Oct 19 2004, 22:19
- - Gabriel   Yes, changing -V is (generally) a better idea than...   Oct 20 2004, 08:45
- - ezra2323   After reading through this thread, I'm still u...   Dec 15 2004, 03:51
|- - dev0   QUOTE (ezra2323 @ Dec 15 2004, 03:51 AM)After...   Dec 15 2004, 06:12
||- - k.eight.a   QUOTE (Vietwoojagig @ Jan 29 2004, 02:38 AM)2...   Dec 15 2004, 18:32
|- - whcanilang   QUOTE (ezra2323 @ Dec 14 2004, 10:51 PM)After...   Dec 22 2004, 21:16
||- - music_man_mpc   QUOTE (whcanilang @ Dec 22 2004, 12:16 PM)Whe...   Dec 22 2004, 21:42
|- - esa372   QUOTE (ezra2323 @ Dec 14 2004, 07:51 PM)Is 3....   Jan 19 2005, 18:23
- - Gabriel   QUOTE I just noticed that http://lame.sourceforge....   Dec 23 2004, 09:16
- - veikko   Hi. I just registered myself for the first time e...   Feb 9 2005, 23:25
|- - schonenberg   QUOTE (veikko @ Feb 9 2005, 04:25 PM)Hi. I j...   Apr 5 2005, 08:38
||- - guruboolez   QUOTE (schonenberg @ Apr 5 2005, 08:38 AM)Lam...   Apr 5 2005, 08:48
|- - Madrigal   QUOTE (veikko @ Feb 9 2005, 05:25 PM)Hi. I j...   Apr 5 2005, 13:46
- - Gabriel   A bug regarding -q0 and -q1 has been recently iden...   Feb 9 2005, 23:34
- - kwanbis   Garbiel would this fix be backported to 3.96.x?   Feb 10 2005, 00:30
- - Gabriel   Probably not as we are not working on 3.96 anymore...   Feb 10 2005, 09:51
- - JEN   my hearing is either getting really bad (i'm 2...   Mar 6 2005, 20:02
- - TheStonepedo   I fail to understand the b value of 128 on -V 0. ...   May 20 2005, 04:42
|- - Jojo   QUOTE (TheStonepedo @ May 19 2005, 07:42 PM)I...   May 20 2005, 17:20
|- - =trott=   QUOTE (TheStonepedo @ May 19 2005, 07:42 PM)I...   Jun 23 2005, 12:02
|- - guruboolez   QUOTE (=trott= @ Jun 23 2005, 12:02 PM)you ha...   Jun 23 2005, 12:22
- - tycho   I believe the -b 32 will override the default (128...   May 20 2005, 07:36
- - latuman   Hi! I'm new to this forum. I registered b...   Nov 16 2005, 12:20
|- - Alex B   QUOTE (latuman @ Nov 16 2005, 01:20 PM)-V6 --...   Nov 16 2005, 13:05
- - latuman   I might be a bit thick, but whats the point using ...   Nov 16 2005, 17:27
|- - Gambit   QUOTE (latuman @ Nov 16 2005, 06:27 PM)I migh...   Nov 17 2005, 00:22
|- - Alex B   QUOTE (latuman @ Nov 16 2005, 06:27 PM)I migh...   Nov 17 2005, 01:16
- - latuman   So I shall leave that setting alone for portable u...   Nov 17 2005, 10:54
- - DickxLaurent   Is there an updated copy of the chart in the first...   Jun 19 2006, 03:44
|- - pika2000   QUOTE (DickxLaurent @ Jun 18 2006, 19:44)...   Jun 19 2006, 06:59
- - Alex B   I have posted an updated table here: http://www.hy...   Jun 19 2006, 04:42
|- - DickxLaurent   QUOTE (Alex B @ Jun 18 2006, 22:42) I hav...   Jun 19 2006, 05:19
- - Jojo   the minimum bitrate should be removed from the cha...   Jun 20 2006, 20:21
- - ThyBzi   Sorry for possible offtopic. I just found this top...   Nov 29 2006, 20:36
- - jmartis   Spertrograms are no judge of sound quality. Use an...   Nov 29 2006, 21:25
- - Firon   -k will absolutely destroy the quality of the file...   Nov 30 2006, 03:27
|- - ThyBzi   QUOTE (Firon @ Nov 30 2006, 08:27) Settin...   Dec 4 2006, 08:44
|- - greynol   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Dec 3 2006, 23:44) Hmm......   Dec 4 2006, 08:49
- - greynol   -m s isn't such a bright idea either. Never...   Nov 30 2006, 03:29
- - ThyBzi   Thanx for your support, people But, as far as I ...   Nov 30 2006, 19:22
|- - greynol   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Nov 30 2006, 10:22) Are t...   Nov 30 2006, 19:49
|- - pepoluan   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Dec 1 2006, 01:22) Thanx ...   Nov 30 2006, 20:28
- - halb27   To me the main problem is that you seem to think i...   Nov 30 2006, 19:45
- - ThyBzi   "(The mere fact that Joint Stereo is used in ...   Nov 30 2006, 20:31
|- - pepoluan   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Dec 1 2006, 02:31) ...   Nov 30 2006, 20:40
|- - greynol   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Nov 30 2006, 11:31) Or di...   Nov 30 2006, 20:58
- - ThyBzi   QUOTE Do you have foobar2000 installed on your sys...   Dec 1 2006, 18:49
|- - greynol   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Dec 1 2006, 09:49) I down...   Dec 1 2006, 20:03
- - ThyBzi   Thanx a lot, you all just broke down my hasty and ...   Dec 2 2006, 12:09
- - dv1989   2) The new VBR method, faster and reputed several ...   Dec 2 2006, 12:23
- - robert   1 - because it makes no difference for VBR NEW, no...   Dec 2 2006, 12:33
|- - ThyBzi   Thanks Dv1989 and thanks Robert (an answer from LA...   Dec 2 2006, 13:04
|- - dv1989   QUOTE (ThyBzi @ Dec 2 2006, 12:04) But wh...   Dec 2 2006, 14:38
- - dv1989   Wow, LAME 3.98 should be interesting! Thanks ...   Dec 2 2006, 12:36
- - halb27   Before 3.97 development started --vbr-new wasn...   Dec 2 2006, 13:49
- - ThyBzi   Thanx for all! I'll try using -V2 --vbr-ne...   Dec 2 2006, 17:42
- - Firon   QUOTE You are partially wrong. In low-bitrate, Jo...   Dec 4 2006, 09:49
- - ThyBzi   Thanks again Now I see, LAME is even more clever ...   Dec 4 2006, 17:12


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: 26th December 2014 - 03:50