IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

11 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings, V2 (for LAME 3.97)
beowulf7
post Oct 27 2005, 07:36
Post #176





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



OK, I just ran lame from the command line for the first time. Previously, I used to encode my music as CBR via the LAME plug-in that I have for GoldWave. Anyway, here's the output. Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean? Thanks.

C:\Program Files\LAME>lame -V 2 --vbr-new "<directory_path\file_name.wav>" "<directory_path\file_name.mp3>"
LAME version 3.96.1 (http://lame.sourceforge.net/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), 3DNow! (ASM used), SSE, SSE2
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 18671 Hz - 19205 Hz
Encoding <directory_path\file_name.wav>
to <directory_path\file_name.mp3>
Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=2) j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III (ca. 7.3x) qval=3
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
167050/167052(100%)| 4:42/ 4:42| 4:42/ 4:42| 15.447x| 0:00
32 [ 31] *
128 [ 2564] %***
160 [ 16901] %%*******************
192 [ 43138] %%%%%%%***********************************************
224 [ 53440] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************************************
256 [ 35980] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%***************************
320 [ 14999] %%%%%%%%%%%%*******
average: 223.3 kbps LR: 42165 (25.24%) MS: 124888 (74.76%)

Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -7.7dB

C:\Program Files\LAME>


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
stephanV
post Oct 27 2005, 08:18
Post #177





Group: Members
Posts: 394
Joined: 6-May 04
Member No.: 13932



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 27 2005, 08:13 AM)
Can I use the recommended settings for LAME 3.97 that's stickied in this forum for my LAME 3.96.1?

You can use anything you want, but its not recommended. tongue.gif

QUOTE
Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean?


Left-Right stereo and Mid-Side stereo. Two different ways of representing stereo sound, sometimes one is more effiecient than the other.

This post has been edited by stephanV: Oct 27 2005, 08:20


--------------------
"We cannot win against obsession. They care, we don't. They win."
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Oct 27 2005, 16:13
Post #178





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



suggestion: I don't see any mention of encoding audio books/speeches/mono sources. I tried several versions in the 3.93 days of vbr, abr and cbr with different settings, sampling frequencies, low pass filters etc. and could never match --preset-voice. It sounds awesome and gives about 25x compression. I'd like to see this setting in the guide.

Is there such a preset working in 3.97b1 ?
Does it deliver the best for the goal/bitrate ?
of course, then it belongs to the recommended settings.
Can you give the necessary informations regarding averaged bitrates, if it is mono or not ?


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Oct 27 2005, 16:35
Post #179


LAME developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 2950
Joined: 1-October 01
From: Nanterre, France
Member No.: 138



--preset voice is only available in the command line front-end, and is there for compatibility.
It is currently mapped to --abr 56 -mm, so that means that the recommendation would be to encode in mono, and use abr. As simple as that.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Oct 28 2005, 00:44
Post #180





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (stephanV @ Oct 27 2005, 03:18 AM)
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 27 2005, 08:13 AM)
Can I use the recommended settings for LAME 3.97 that's stickied in this forum for my LAME 3.96.1?

You can use anything you want, but its not recommended. tongue.gif

OK, haha, you're right, I can use anything I guess. But what would the recommended settings be for LAME 3.96.1 to be roughly equivalent to 3.97's -V2 setting? Thanks.

QUOTE (stephanV @ Oct 27 2005, 03:18 AM)
QUOTE
Can someone help me interpret what LR and MS mean?


Left-Right stereo and Mid-Side stereo. Two different ways of representing stereo sound, sometimes one is more effiecient than the other.
*


Thanks, that makes sense. I guess it's for statistical purposes only, and to me, the #s dont' mean much until I can compare it with other compressions.


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
stephanV
post Oct 28 2005, 09:10
Post #181





Group: Members
Posts: 394
Joined: 6-May 04
Member No.: 13932



Lame 3.96.1 also has the -V setting right? So use -V 2 or -V 3 (whatever fits your bit rate needs better) and be happy smile.gif


--------------------
"We cannot win against obsession. They care, we don't. They win."
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pearson
post Oct 31 2005, 23:08
Post #182





Group: Members
Posts: 98
Joined: 4-June 02
Member No.: 2219



This is quoted from the 'Quick Start' section of the "List of recommended LAME settings" thread:

QUOTE
Very low bitrate, small sizes: eg. for voice, radio, mono encoding etc.
--abr xx (e.g. --abr 80)


Shouldn't there be a suggested setting for mono encoding in "High Quality" as well? There are good mono recordings that would be served by a HQ mono setting. From the recommendation above it sounds as if mono should be encoded with abr.

In the old days I think there was some kind of (albeit weak) consensus that -m m -b 80 could be added to the old --preset standard setting for mono encoding. Does this work OK with 3.97 as well?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Nov 1 2005, 00:38
Post #183





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Pearson @ Oct 31 2005, 11:08 PM)
In the old days I think there was some kind of (albeit weak) consensus that -m m -b 80 could be added to the old --preset standard setting for mono encoding. Does this work OK with 3.97 as well?
*

-b80 is not necessary anymore with -vbr-new mode. But with the other VBR mode, I think that -b128 is still here by default. Therefore, -b80 should be worth.



EDIT: typo.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Nov 1 2005, 01:15
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pearson
post Nov 1 2005, 01:02
Post #184





Group: Members
Posts: 98
Joined: 4-June 02
Member No.: 2219



Thanks for the clarification!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LiTEMaTTeR
post Nov 3 2005, 01:04
Post #185





Group: Members
Posts: 43
Joined: 8-April 04
Member No.: 13327



In lame 3.97b does it store the setting used like the lame 3.90.3 modified compile did? In other words, if -V 2 = APS will the lameheader file indicate V2/APS was used somewhere?

On a diff note if V2 = APS on this compile then why do they get different bitrate avgs?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jojo
post Nov 3 2005, 08:13
Post #186





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



QUOTE (LiTEMaTTeR @ Nov 2 2005, 05:04 PM)
In lame 3.97b does it store the setting used like the lame 3.90.3 modified compile did? In other words, if -V 2 = APS will the lameheader file indicate V2/APS was used somewhere?

yes, this fuction was introduced in one of the recent lame releases and was backported to the old and unefficient Lame 3.90.3 release.
QUOTE (LiTEMaTTeR @ Nov 2 2005, 05:04 PM)
On a diff note if V2 = APS on this compile then why do they get different bitrate avgs?
*

no, --preset standard and -V2 produces the exact same file (therefore same bitrate).

This post has been edited by Jojo: Nov 3 2005, 08:13


--------------------
--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
burnett_s
post Nov 5 2005, 06:43
Post #187





Group: Members
Posts: 97
Joined: 19-June 03
From: ARG
Member No.: 7291



Hi everybody,

By default, ReplayGain analysis is enabled afaik it is not compatible with foobar's RG tag and portable mp3 players. So, wouldn't be better to add --noreplaygain to the command line to disable ReplayGain analysis and prevent LAME from applying gain to each track individually instead of to the album as a whole ?
Encoding a live or mixed album track by track, not as an image, with this command line option enabled isn't such a good idea, isn't it? unsure.gif

ReplayGain disabled: -V2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain

EAC's command line with replaygain disabled:
CODE
-V 2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain  --ignore-tag-errors --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" %s %d


Please correct me if I'm wrong unsure.gif

Greetings

EDIT: typo

This post has been edited by burnett_s: Nov 5 2005, 08:52


--------------------
Greetings
Sonny Burnett.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Madrigal
post Nov 5 2005, 09:04
Post #188





Group: Members
Posts: 344
Joined: 8-December 01
From: Indiana, U.S.A.
Member No.: 608



QUOTE (burnett_s @ Nov 5 2005, 12:43 AM)
Hi everybody,

By default, ReplayGain analysis is enabled afaik it is not compatible with foobar's RG tag and portable mp3 players. So, wouldn't be better to add --noreplaygain to the command line to disable ReplayGain analysis and prevent LAME from applying gain to each track individually instead of to the album as a whole ?
Encoding a live or mixed album track by track, not as an image, with this command line option enabled isn't such a good idea, isn't it?  unsure.gif

ReplayGain disabled: -V2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain

EAC's command line with replaygain disabled:
CODE
-V 2 --vbr-new --noreplaygain  --ignore-tag-errors --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" --tg "%m" %s %d


Please correct me if I'm wrong unsure.gif

Greetings

EDIT: typo
*
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought LAME's replaygain analysis was for screen display only, during operation, and had nothing at all to do with applying gain to the tracks themselves. I have confirmed this to myself several times, using Mp3Gain.

That said, use of the --noreplaygain switch can still be useful. In my case at least, it speeds up the encoding process considerably.

Regards,
Madrigal
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjoonlee
post Nov 5 2005, 10:23
Post #189





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



RG metadata is written to the LAME/INFO tag. The only program that I know of that uses that info is Otachan's in_mpg123.


--------------------
http://blacksun.ivyro.net/vorbis/vorbisfaq.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Nov 5 2005, 12:20
Post #190


LAME developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 2950
Joined: 1-October 01
From: Nanterre, France
Member No.: 138



It is also used by Madplay.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Madrigal
post Nov 5 2005, 19:47
Post #191





Group: Members
Posts: 344
Joined: 8-December 01
From: Indiana, U.S.A.
Member No.: 608



@kjoonlee & Gabriel:

Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,
Madrigal
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Nov 6 2005, 19:09
Post #192





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



Now that I'm using LAME 3.97 beta (despite my paranoia of beta software), I'm wondering if it's worth using --preset extreme (VBR) over --preset standard (VBR). In a double-blind test, is the slight difference in quality discernable by a good pair of ears? Thanks.

This post has been edited by beowulf7: Nov 6 2005, 19:12


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Nov 28 2005, 11:42
Post #193





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



Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shade[ST]
post Nov 28 2005, 13:16
Post #194





Group: Members
Posts: 1189
Joined: 19-May 05
From: Montreal, Canada
Member No.: 22144



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Nov 6 2005, 12:09 PM)
Now that I'm using LAME 3.97 beta (despite my paranoia of beta software), I'm wondering if it's worth using --preset extreme (VBR) over --preset standard (VBR).  In a double-blind test, is the slight difference in quality discernable by a good pair of ears?  Thanks.
*

to make a quick answer, probably not, but you can check yourself.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
VCSkier
post Nov 28 2005, 21:09
Post #195





Group: Members
Posts: 447
Joined: 26-January 05
From: LynchburgVA(US)
Member No.: 19325



for me v2 is transparent on all but a very few, extreme problem samples... i dont recall which ones at the moment, but in real music situations, i have yet to find a sample that i can abx.


--------------------
a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Echizen
post Nov 28 2005, 21:39
Post #196





Group: Members
Posts: 70
Joined: 22-April 03
Member No.: 6122



For me V3 is almost transparent and it gives a good balance between quality and file size.

This post has been edited by Echizen: Nov 28 2005, 21:42
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Nov 29 2005, 04:45
Post #197





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (user @ Nov 28 2005, 06:42 AM)
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
*

You're right. But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder. LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
burnett_s
post Nov 29 2005, 05:34
Post #198





Group: Members
Posts: 97
Joined: 19-June 03
From: ARG
Member No.: 7291



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Nov 29 2005, 12:45 AM)
QUOTE (user @ Nov 28 2005, 06:42 AM)
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
*

You're right. But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder. LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.
*



IMHO, official recommendation should be updated to use LAME 3.97 beta 2 instead of beta 1 as the recommended LAME encoder version.

Gr.
Gonzalo


--------------------
Greetings
Sonny Burnett.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Nov 29 2005, 06:07
Post #199





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (burnett_s @ Nov 29 2005, 12:34 AM)
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Nov 29 2005, 12:45 AM)
QUOTE (user @ Nov 28 2005, 06:42 AM)
Great, Lame 3.97b2 has come out,
from changelog, it seems obvious to me, to recommend it instead of 3.97b1.
*

You're right. But I'd still like official recommendation from this forum before I upgrade the encoder. LAME 3.98 is also in its alpha 2 state, but who knows when it will hit beta.
*



IMHO, official recommendation should be updated to use LAME 3.97 beta 2 instead of beta 1 as the recommended LAME encoder version.

Gr.
Gonzalo
*


I PM'd "user" about it, so hopefully he'll update the first post of the thread and that someone will change the link from that 3rd sticky in this forum.


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JayShoemaker
post Jun 16 2006, 21:39
Post #200





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 13-December 05
Member No.: 26391



You can add Tag&Rename to the Tagging Software section...

Very good software!

http://www.softpointer.com/tr.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

11 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 > » 
Closed 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 November 2014 - 17:39