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
Gray_Wolf
post Jan 14 2005, 17:10
Post #2





Group: Banned
Posts: 112
Joined: 19-September 04
Member No.: 17117



This is incredible mad.gif

Many people in present moment believe that Lame CBR 192kbps - Stereo mode is the best solution mad.gif sick.gif

This post has been edited by Gray_Wolf: Jan 14 2005, 18:33
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
crazyman
post Jan 19 2005, 09:30
Post #3





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



QUOTE (Gray_Wolf @ Jan 14 2005, 08:10 AM)
This is incredible  mad.gif

Many people in present moment believe that Lame CBR 192kbps - Stereo mode is the best solution  mad.gif  sick.gif
*


Quite agree. Even some good rippers (f.i. CDEx) in help file say that for internal encoder, stereo is the recommended option ...

Rgds,

Crzmn
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Jan 19 2005, 11:44
Post #4





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



QUOTE (crazyman @ Jan 19 2005, 12:30 AM)
Quite agree. Even some good rippers (f.i. CDEx) in help file say that for internal encoder, stereo is the recommended option ...

Rgds,

Crzmn
*


If it isn't referring to LAME, that isn't necessarily wrong though
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
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th November 2014 - 17:57