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
MugFunky
post Jan 20 2005, 06:29
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 493
Joined: 28-December 03
From: Melbourne, Aus
Member No.: 10767



guh, why has this myth never been dispelled?

it should be mentioned in the TOS or something.

[edit] something like "MS joint-stereo is not lossy! it's simply a way to decorellate data so it can be stored more efficiently". also mention that the lossy IS stereo mode is not implemented in LAME, and probably never will be.

for a start, just because DPL might bork your stereo image is no reason to pre-bork your mp3s. dolby pro-logic is not relevant for music that is mixed and mastered as stereo. and if it were mixed and mastered for DPL, i highly doubt (but cannot prove without an actual DPL decoder) that a preset-standard mp3's transparency will break on it. so pro-logic is no reason to encode in LR stereo. DPLII is much more sophisticated than DPL, but again, you'd be stupid to use it on stuff that wasn't meant for it (though apparently it's brilliant on SQ quad records though, having been heavily based on a quad decoder itself).

besides, MS can't be lossy if you're able to put an equals sign between it and LR - maths doesn't work that way. it's best to leave the decision of where to go LR and where to go MS to lame itself, rather than forcing it. after all, by forcing LR, you are disabling a feature of the encoder, rather than improving it.

This post has been edited by MugFunky: Jan 20 2005, 06:32
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DreamTactix291
post Jan 20 2005, 06:56
Post #3





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 552
Joined: 9-June 04
From: A place long since forgotten...
Member No.: 14572



QUOTE (MugFunky @ Jan 19 2005, 11:29 PM)
guh, why has this myth never been dispelled?

No idea. Even when I was a newbie after I'd read about the L/R to M/S process I understood it once. Just two ways to express the same data and letting the encoder pick which one is more efficient is what LAME does in its joint stereo mode.

I agree that somewhere this should be posted where it is obvious that using M/S stereo is not lossy. If it was certain lossless encoders couldn't use it (I know one does but I can't remember which one)


--------------------
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45
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
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th August 2014 - 06:14