IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Any listening test Stereo vs Joint stereo in mp3?
crazyman
post Jan 14 2005, 14:46
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 92
Joined: 9-July 04
Member No.: 15216



Hi all,

in many discussions I read about mp3 via Lame encoder the result is that the best solution is joint stereo. I believe in that as the developers who I highly esteem say so. But is this statement supported also by more independent listening tests? Especially I would be interested in comparison between --preset standard (joint stereo) and dtto with stereo mode.

Can the result in general depend also on the Lame version? From the tests I could read usually still the old good Lame 3.90.3 comes out as the winner.

Cheers,

Crazyman
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
beto
post Jan 14 2005, 14:51
Post #2





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 713
Joined: 8-July 04
From: Sao Paulo
Member No.: 15173



This makes no sense, since joint stereo is just a way to encode stereo losslessly.

There should be no audible difference between them AFAIK....


--------------------
http://volutabro.blogspot.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mithrandir
post Jan 14 2005, 16:38
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 669
Joined: 15-January 02
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 1032



QUOTE (beto @ Jan 14 2005, 08:51 AM)
This makes no sense, since joint stereo is just a way to encode stereo losslessly.

There should be no audible difference between them AFAIK....
*

No, joint stereo is lossy. That's what directed the Scene to use full stereo mode (not that they really know what they are doing). But joint stereo can be objectively transparent if implemented properly...and it can save you a lot of bits. There is generally no need to use full stereo in LAME.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Jan 14 2005, 18:42
Post #4





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



QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 04:38 PM)
No, joint stereo is lossy. That's what directed the Scene to use full stereo mode (not that they really know what they are doing). But joint stereo can be objectively transparent if implemented properly...and it can save you a lot of bits. There is generally no need to use full stereo in LAME.
*


No, Joint Stereo is lossless concerning stereo information. Some scene groups are using 'full stereo' VBR, because using a Dolby Pro Logic or similliar surround DSP will unmask JS artifacts, which are masked under normal (=stereo) playback conditions.
For more information see this thread:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=12004


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mithrandir
post Jan 14 2005, 22:44
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 669
Joined: 15-January 02
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 1032



QUOTE (dev0 @ Jan 14 2005, 12:42 PM)
QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 04:38 PM)
No, joint stereo is lossy. That's what directed the Scene to use full stereo mode (not that they really know what they are doing). But joint stereo can be objectively transparent if implemented properly...and it can save you a lot of bits. There is generally no need to use full stereo in LAME.
*


No, Joint Stereo is lossless concerning stereo information. Some scene groups are using 'full stereo' VBR, because using a Dolby Pro Logic or similliar surround DSP will unmask JS artifacts, which are masked under normal (=stereo) playback conditions.
For more information see this thread:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=12004
*

I think there is some confusion here...and perhaps it is me. This is what I mean:

If you encode with VBR -V 5, which uses joint stereo not full, it is possible to positively ABX between WAV and MP3 from a stereo perspective (i.e. -V 5 has a smaller soundstage than original thanks to more aggressive use of mid-side frames instead of LR). The variable here is --nsmsfix. Set it low enough (closer to 0) and it would probably be impossible to ABX between MP3 and WAV in terms of stereo performance.

If joint stereo were in fact lossless then why does LAME have to decide between LR and MS frame allocation? It's going lossy in many cases to save bitrate.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jojo
post Jan 15 2005, 01:49
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 1361
Joined: 25-November 02
Member No.: 3873



QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 01:44 PM)
If joint stereo were in fact lossless then why does LAME have to decide between LR and MS frame allocation? It's going lossy in many cases to save bitrate.
*

even if that was the case...Joint-Stereo would be still better than 'Stereo'...I mean, mp3 is a lossy format afterall...however, I don't think that Joint-Stereo used in --preset standard is lossy...


--------------------
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Jan 15 2005, 01:55
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 730
Joined: 5-January 04
Member No.: 10970



QUOTE (Jojo @ Jan 14 2005, 04:49 PM)
QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 01:44 PM)
If joint stereo were in fact lossless then why does LAME have to decide between LR and MS frame allocation? It's going lossy in many cases to save bitrate.
*

even if that was the case...Joint-Stereo would be still better than 'Stereo'...I mean, mp3 is a lossy format afterall...
*


Huh!?

Doing things that could be messing up the stereo separation is the last thing I'd like to see at high bit-rates

This post has been edited by Busemann: Jan 15 2005, 01:55
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- crazyman   Any listening test Stereo vs Joint stereo in mp3?   Jan 14 2005, 14:46
- - beto   This makes no sense, since joint stereo is just a ...   Jan 14 2005, 14:51
|- - mithrandir   QUOTE (beto @ Jan 14 2005, 08:51 AM)This make...   Jan 14 2005, 16:38
|- - Otto42   QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 09:38 AM)No,...   Jan 14 2005, 16:50
|- - dev0   QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 04:38 PM)No,...   Jan 14 2005, 18:42
|- - Mark7   QUOTE (dev0 @ Jan 14 2005, 09:42 AM)QUOTE (mi...   Jan 14 2005, 19:04
|- - mithrandir   QUOTE (dev0 @ Jan 14 2005, 12:42 PM)QUOTE (mi...   Jan 14 2005, 22:44
|- - Jojo   QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 01:44 PM)If ...   Jan 15 2005, 01:49
|- - Busemann   QUOTE (Jojo @ Jan 14 2005, 04:49 PM)QUOTE (mi...   Jan 15 2005, 01:55
|- - Jojo   QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 14 2005, 04:55 PM)QUOTE...   Jan 15 2005, 02:03
- - SirGrey   >>No, joint stereo is lossy. Wrong. joint-st...   Jan 14 2005, 16:48
- - SirGrey   Addenium: Lots of the confusion goes from Fhg. The...   Jan 14 2005, 16:53
- - Gray_Wolf   This is incredible Many people in present mome...   Jan 14 2005, 17:10
|- - crazyman   QUOTE (Gray_Wolf @ Jan 14 2005, 08:10 AM)This...   Jan 19 2005, 09:30
|- - Busemann   QUOTE (crazyman @ Jan 19 2005, 12:30 AM)Quite...   Jan 19 2005, 11:44
|- - crazyman   QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 19 2005, 02:44 AM)QUOTE...   Jan 20 2005, 11:29
- - Jojo   The bottom line is that Joint-Stereo used in LAME ...   Jan 14 2005, 17:53
- - 2Bdecided   The stereo to joint stereo (i.e. L+R>M+S) trans...   Jan 17 2005, 16:34
|- - crazyman   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Jan 17 2005, 07:34 AM)The ...   Jan 19 2005, 09:25
|- - mithrandir   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Jan 17 2005, 10:34 AM)The ...   Jan 20 2005, 05:52
- - MugFunky   guh, why has this myth never been dispelled? it s...   Jan 20 2005, 06:29
|- - DreamTactix291   QUOTE (MugFunky @ Jan 19 2005, 11:29 PM)guh, ...   Jan 20 2005, 06:56
- - Gabriel   The M/S stereo transform itself is lossless. Howev...   Jan 20 2005, 09:13
- - 2Bdecided   Talk about things coming back to bite you... I...   Jan 21 2005, 12:10
- - Gabriel   Well, in your case intensity stereo is a good thin...   Jan 21 2005, 13:55
|- - Bogalvator   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Jan 21 2005, 04:55 AM)Well, ...   Jan 22 2005, 04:49
|- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Jan 21 2005, 12:55 PM)Well, ...   Jan 24 2005, 17:00
- - Gabriel   QUOTE but the broadcasters have reportedly asked f...   Jan 24 2005, 20:41
- - Ossie   Hi, I just want to check if the following staement...   May 21 2005, 10:57
- - Pio2001   It all depends if the psychoacoustic model can han...   May 21 2005, 13:01
- - Pio2001   Oh, that's not all, you'll have to force m...   May 21 2005, 13:07
- - mjkng2   hey this is an old article against Joint Stereo: ...   Aug 4 2006, 19:20
|- - Garf   QUOTE (mjkng2 @ Aug 4 2006, 20:20) hey t...   Aug 5 2006, 09:44
- - stephanV   It's not against JS... it just says that an al...   Aug 4 2006, 20:16
- - Pio2001   I've performed two joint stereo listening test...   Aug 4 2006, 22:52
- - haregoo   This sample is ABXable(16/16) even with -V 0 becau...   Aug 5 2006, 03:57
- - Gabriel   QUOTE (haregoo @ Aug 5 2006, 04:57) This ...   Aug 5 2006, 08:48
- - haregoo   QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 5 2006, 16:48) Regar...   Aug 5 2006, 14:14


Reply to this topicStart new topic
3 User(s) are reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st September 2014 - 15:03