IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

11 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
[Discussion] List of recommended LAME settings, V2 (for LAME 3.97)
user
post Sep 27 2005, 12:22
Post #76





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



well, indeed,

dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.
(referring to what synthetic soul said.)

He Pmed me, he cannot restore my/our work of the last week(s), hours I invested, he made no backup.
He could simply delete it, but not building up.

I can only hope, that he finds somewhere a copy of latest content/backup, then we are lucky.
The attempt of now trying to make now own work, is quite hopeless, doesn#t *repair the damage done.
*citing a song, which is known, and doesn#t contain 4-letter words in the citing wink.gif


I will make a last attempt to repair a smuch a spossible, I have a backup of the german version of the sticky post dated from 2 days later, so many updates are contained, though it is silly work to restore work, which was already done, for everybody, me, dev0, all the guys who wrote their ideas here, which were all represented in the sticky topic by me, as much as it is possible to represent a lot of opinions.

This post has been edited by user: Sep 27 2005, 12:40


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Sep 27 2005, 12:24
Post #77





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



QUOTE (user @ Sep 27 2005, 12:22 PM)
dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.
*


I'd like to hear other's oppinions about that.
Credit for my suggestions goes mostly to benc and you though.


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 12:30
Post #78





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



Thanks.

Apart from that, I like the format.

However, am I being thick? That post explains the different encoding tecniques (VBR/CBR/ABR) of LAME, and has a quickstart stating that -V2 --vbr-new is recommended - but there is no other mention of recommendations.

The current text is, on the whole, an explanation of LAME usage.

Do you/we intend to add more recommendations, or is the thinking that users can make their own conclusions given this information?

Will the new thread contain the EAC recommended command lines (how about foobar) and links to software?

I guess I'm just jumping the gun a bit here. unsure.gif

Edit: NB: written before user's post.

I still like the format - it's clean and easy to follow. I just wonder whether we will be sticking our neck out on "recommendations" more.

Edit 2: Sorry missed this:

QUOTE (dev0 @ Sep 27 2005, 12:02 PM)
Links and EAC tutorial are intentionally missing.


This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Sep 27 2005, 12:35


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Sep 27 2005, 12:37
Post #79





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



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Sep 27 2005, 12:30 PM)
However, am I being thick?  That post explains the different encoding tecniques (VBR/CBR/ABR) of LAME, and has a quickstart stating that -V2 --vbr-new is recommended - but there is no other mention of recommendations.

The current text is, on the whole, an explanation of LAME usage.

I understand your concern and I'm thinking about ways to make recommendations, but in the end it's always hard to make a clear recommendation. If you look at the other recommendation threads, you'll see a similiar emphasis there.
As the usage of commandline encoders gets simpler (I consider the -V settings a huge improvment over the old --preset[s]), the need for such threads gets smaller.
As user explained the "recommended settings" thread was started at a time when getting the best quality out of LAME was quite a complex task.

QUOTE
Do you/we intend to add more recommendations, or is the thinking that users can make their own conclusions given this information?

If anybody has any good ideas about how to do this, of course.

QUOTE
Will the new thread contain the EAC recommended command lines (how about foobar) and links to software?
*

Of course. The EAC part is IMHO one of the most important parts. I just left it out, because everyone seems to be fine with taking over case's wording.
foobar2000 0.9 will feature the recommended settings by default.


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Sep 27 2005, 12:45
Post #80


LAME developer


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



Here is the previous one, from Google cache

QUOTE
Major update with Lame 3.97:




Updated 2005-09-16






These settings require Lame 3.97 or later. Lame 3.97beta1 (beta=b) found on this website is the recommended version. (Check here or Rarewares to download).
Do not use alpha (a) versions ! Those are for testing purposes, if you want.

Note: At a given bitrate range, the quality scale is following: VBR is higher quality than ABR which is higher quality than CBR (VBR > ABR > CBR in terms of quality). The exception to this is when you choose the highest possible CBR bitrate, which is 320 kbps (--alt-preset insane).
VBR: variable bitrate mode, the goal is to keep a constant quality and saving bits where possible without lowering the quality.
ABR: average bitrate mode varies bits around a specified target bitrate
CBR: constant bitrate mode is not efficient regarding distributing bitrate to more complex music parts and saving bits where it would be possible without lowering the quality of those music parts.
Note: all modes and settings mentioned in this topic belong to the specifications of the MP3 standard, and the resulting MP3s should be played by every standard-conform MP3-Decoder. If this shouldn't be the case, blame the manufacturer or developer of your MP3-Decoder/device. Neither the hydrogenaudio.org community, HA staff, nor the authors of this post take any responsibility for anything.

Discussion has been moved here.






-------------------------------------------------
Recommended encoder settings:
-------------------------------------------------

The settings, presets are listed beginning with highest possible quality stepping down to lower qualities:

CODE


Switch            equals preset        target kbit/s  Bitrate range kbit/s

-b 320          = --preset insane        320 CBR    320
-V 0            = --preset extreme      240      245285
-V 0 --vbr-new  = --preset fast extreme  240      245285
-V 1                                    210      220260
-V 1 --vbr-new                          210      220260
-V 2            = --preset standard      190      170210
-V 2 --vbr-new  = --preset fast standard 190      170210
-V 3                                    175      155195
-V 3 --vbr-new                          175      155195
-V 4            = --preset medium        165      145185
-V 4 --vbr-new  = --preset fast medium  165      145185
-V 5                                    130      110150
-V 5 --vbr-new                          130      110150
-V 6                                    115      95135
-V 6 --vbr-new                          115      95135
-V 7                                    100      80120
-V 7 --vbr-new                          100      80120
-V 8                                      85      65105
-V 8 - vbr-new                            85      65105
-V 9                                      65      4585
-V 9 - vbr-new                            65      4585




If the target is eg. streaming , where you need MP3 in ABR or even CBR mode, there are still the ABR and CBR modes.
You can specify your desired target bitrate:

ABR = Average Bitrate mode:

--abr xxx = --preset xxx

xxx (desired averaged bitrate in kbit/s) can be any value between 8 - 320 , like eg. 9, 17, 80, 128, 133, 200 etc.

Only for 128k ABR:
There was developed an alternative to the --abr 128 preset:
ff123's and Hans' suggestion (http://www.ff123.net/cbr128.html):
--abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93
Different people have different tastes regarding artefacts and their behaviour of annoyance, so try out --abr 128 vs. --abr 128 -h --nspsytune --athtype 2 --lowpass 16 --ns-bass -8 --scale 0.93


CBR = Constant Bitrate mode:

-b xxx = --preset cbr xxx

xxx (desired bitrate in kbit/s) can be only: 8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 64 , 80 , 96 , 112 , 128 , 160 , 192 , 256 or 320








Remarks:
the --vbr-new switch enables the new VBR mode. Lame will encode much faster compared to old/default vbr mode. Current knowledge qualitywise comparing vbr with --vbr-new is, that --vbr-new might even be better qualitywise than the default vbr mode, but there are also reports about artefact, which is worse in --vbr-new compared to default. Though the general impression is, that --vbr-new should be recommended over vbr-default.
The presets -V 0 , -V 1 , -V 2 with or without --vbr-new switch and of course -b 320 are considered to be transparent for a majority of people. (transparent = most people cannot distinguish the mp3 from the original in an ABX blindtest)
For high quality on portable MP3 players, you may use -V 4 (--vbr-new)= --preset (fast) medium (around 165 kbit/s).
-V 5 --vbr-new is a very good replacement for 128 kbit/s encodings.

The revolutionary --alt-preset system introduced in lame 3.90, is replaced nowadays by the preset system, which is already substituted by the above explained settings system.
You don't need to worry, if you select nowadays in lame 3.97 either --alt-preset xy , preset xy or corresponding switch xy, you will always get the same.
E.G.: --alt-preset cbr 320 is the exact same thing as --alt-preset insane etc.:
--alt-preset insane = --preset insane = -b 320 = --preset 320 = --preset cbr 320








-------------------------------------------------
Setting up EAC for lame.exe with tagging
-------------------------------------------------
Based on Case's tutorial

Select compression options from EAC menu.
Open 'External Compression' tab.

1. Check 'Use external program for compression'
2. Change 'Parameter passing scheme' to 'User Defined Encoder'
3. Set file extension to .mp3
4. Click 'Browse' and locate 'lame.exe'
5. Change 'Additional command line options' to one of the following commandlines
6. Check 'Delete WAV after compression'
7. Uncheck 'Add ID3 tag'

QUOTE
ID3v1:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v1-only --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --id3v2-only --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

ID3v1 and ID3v2:
-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --pad-id3v2 --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

APEv2: (requires wapet.exe)
%d -t "Artist=%a" -t "Title=%t" -t "Album=%g" -t "Year=%y" -t "Track=%n" -t "Genre=%m" lame.exe -V 2 --vbr-new %s %d

(You can change -V 2 --vbr-new to any setting/preset you'd like to use)

These commandlines are generally recommended over EAC's own tagging routines and its LAME encoder parameter passing preset, which is known to cause problems.
The bitrate setting serves a cosmetic purpose and is used for the size display in EAC's main window.


-------------------------------------------------
Useful links
-------------------------------------------------

(Latest LAME compiles)
Dmitry's compiles
Dibrom's compiles
Rarewares.org MP3 section

(MP3 Information sites)
Hydrogen Audio
Decoder test by David Robinson

(MP3 Forums)
Hydrogenaudio MP3 forum



(Exact Audio Copy) - the best CD ripper & encoding (& tagging) to MP3 (or MPC, Ogg Vorbis) during ripping
Official site
Tutorial for EAC
EAC forum


(LAME Frontends)
RazorLame

EasyLAME (german)

HeadAC3he by Dark Avenger : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2
BeSweet by DSPGuru : ac3 -> wav DS2 -> mp3, ogg vorbis, mp2 with batch-possibility


(Renaming / ID3 Tagging / Music Database)
Tag + Tag Frontend
Helium2
Renatager
MPTagger
More tagging information & programs
CDIndexer : for CD-Audio & data-CDs
MAC: Mpeg Audio Collection



(MP3 Gain) - lossless gain change / "normalizing"!
Official site
Basic Guide to avoid clipping


(How to)
Burn an MP3 CD
Reencode mp3 (high bitrate with ID3 tags) to mp3 (low bitrate) and include tags to new mp3 file : Try Monkeys Audio http://www.monkeysaudio.com/, or maybe better: foobar 2000, use the CLI encoder: http://www.saunalahti.fi/cse/html/foobar.html
MPC -> MP3 by MPCxchange


(Analyzing MP3)
EncSpot
ff123's artefact training
Tool for ABXing, Blind listening tests
ff123's site: Discussion of Audio Compression including sites to evaluate your own capability of listening
Training of musically listening good-ear.com
Training of listening to encoder's artefacts pcabx.com
MP3Utility

QuickSFV, SVF and MD5 checksums for files


-------------------------------------------------
Credits
-------------------------------------------------

A big thanks to all LAME developers for making one kickass MP3 codec.

People who took part in suggesting the different settings:
Dibrom, r3mix, ff123, Hans Heijden, kjempen, Benjamin Lebsanft, GeSomeone, Wombat & GuruBoolez for his immense testing.

Creation of the alt preset system and related special code level quality enhancements:
Dibrom, with technical assistance from Robert Hegemann and Naoki Shibata and extensive tuning help and quality verification via listening tests from JohnV and also initial help (--dm-preset era) from Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, and others. Test clips, bitrate information, and further listening tests provided by TheBashar, zbutsam, Pio2001, BadDuDeX, r3mix, h, TarX, Hans Heijden, ff123, Wombat, Filburt, Volcano, Garf, MrDrew, TrNSZ, nyaochi, Amadeus93, in no particular order, and many, many others I (Dibrom) probably forgot to mention.. (msg me to be added)

Idea (also exposing the need for a unified preset system), Original post and list of original settings collected by: user
Layout and additional work by: dev0, CiTay, SNYder, Dibrom


And finally...

Thank you ALL in the community for making it what it is, providing interest and discussion and helping to work towards the most concise, well tuned, and most thought out MP3 quality "paradigm" seen yet! biggrin.gif -- Dibrom


This post has been edited by Gabriel: Sep 27 2005, 12:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 12:49
Post #81





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



The only thing I can think of with regard to recommendations is to additionally recommend a VBR alternative to CBR 128 (presumably -V5 --vbr-new).

I totally agree that recommendations are difficult. I know there is even contention with regard to -V2, as many (non-HA/non-audiophile) users don't really need this level. I'm not suggesting that -V2 is changed - but simply highlighting that a recommendation is always going to be contentious, as we don't all have the same level of hearing. Mine's not brilliant.

I have just seen your edit and agree that the diversity of the -V switches negates the need so much for recommendations.

I wonder whether the correlation between -V and --(alt-)preset would be useful in the table? I've just seen Gabriel's post of the previous content and that table may be useful to help people move from --(alt-)preset to -V.

I noticed late that you had already stated that the EAC guide and links have been left out. blush.gif

Edit: With regard to the "accusation" of lacking content - I think too much content is just going to be way too confusing for a new user - which this post/thread is supposed to be aimed at! I even think some info - e.g.: the background behind the presets - could be links to other documents, e.g:

If you are interested in reading about the background behind the LAME presets please take a look at this page.

Do new users really care about the background? Spods like me do, but some guy who just wants to rip his "Shitting Grannies" CD for his mate on the 'net couldn't give two hoots.

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Sep 27 2005, 12:54


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kritip
post Sep 27 2005, 12:51
Post #82





Group: Members
Posts: 528
Joined: 15-January 02
From: Warwickshire -- England
Member No.: 1036



Ah, i had the same idea of google cache but couldn't find it. Mind posting the steps you used to locate it??

Cheers,

Kristian
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Sep 27 2005, 12:53
Post #83





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



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Sep 27 2005, 12:49 PM)
I wonder whether the correlation between -V and --(alt-)preset would be useful in the table?  I've just seen Gabriel's post of the previous content and that table may be useful to help people move from --(alt-)preset to -V.
*

I think putting the correlating old preset into the table would cause confusion rather than assisting the transition.
I think a link to this thread would suffice for those who want to know.


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Sep 27 2005, 12:53
Post #84





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



I'm still bothered by the quick start recommendation. Why V2 and not V3? Or V1?
Originally, recommending --preset standard was easy to understand: there were no other preset (apart --r3mix). Standard was the only choice for transparent/efficient encodings.

But now, situation is different. We have V3, V4 and also V1.
V3 or even V4 may be as transparent as V2 for several people. Using them will help them to save bitrate and to use more efficiently the free space of their portable player.
On the other side, V1 might be a better choice for some critical listeners. In my case, V2 is rarelly transparent (on ABX conditions). V1 is simply better (I'd say "more transparent" if it makes sense).

In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Sep 27 2005, 12:57
Post #85





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



--my mistake--

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Sep 27 2005, 12:58
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 12:57
Post #86





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Sep 27 2005, 12:53 PM)
In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".

I don't understand.

Are you suggesting that we don't recommend any value, that we change from -V2 to -VX, or that we have multiple recommendations?

I agreed with most of your response, but I was assuming your conclusion would be that we don't make any recommendations.

Edit:
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Sep 27 2005, 12:57 PM)
--my mistake--

I just thought you were in total agreement with yourself wink.gif

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Sep 27 2005, 12:59


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Sep 27 2005, 13:00
Post #87





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



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Sep 27 2005, 12:57 PM)
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Sep 27 2005, 12:53 PM)
In other word, I suggest to take advantage of the new VBR scale and to think about possible recommendation of the new VBR "presets".

I don't understand.

Are you suggesting that we don't recommend any value, that we change from -V2 to -VX, or that we have multiple recommendations?

I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Sep 27 2005, 13:03
Post #88





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



google cashe was a good idea, but unfortunately, as Gabriel found, it shows also the very old content from 2005-09-16, I found in googles cashe 2005-09-17, progress !
I have 2005-09-18 in german, from which I can retranslate again and use layout for restore.
Though that won't be a sperfect, as the stickly post was made during the weekend, dunno, when i made last edit, Sunday or Monday, yesterday.

And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place., in this topic, posts above.

This post has been edited by user: Sep 27 2005, 13:32


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Sep 27 2005, 13:03
Post #89


LAME developer


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



QUOTE
Ah, i had the same idea of google cache but couldn't find it. Mind posting the steps you used to locate it??

http://www.google.com/search?q=%5BRFC%5D+L...=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 13:04
Post #90





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Sep 27 2005, 01:00 PM)
I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.

OK, thank you.

It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.

Tricky.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sTisTi
post Sep 27 2005, 13:05
Post #91





Group: Members
Posts: 385
Joined: 25-June 04
Member No.: 14895



QUOTE (dev0 @ Sep 27 2005, 03:24 AM)
QUOTE (user @ Sep 27 2005, 12:22 PM)
dev0's suggestion here is lacking too much content, not thought through, illogical.
*


I'd like to hear other's oppinions about that.
Credit for my suggestions goes mostly to benc and you though.
*


I actually like dev0's (Post #73) way of presenting the information better. It looks less cluttered, especially the VBR table. I think it's better to restrict it to the -V x modes and to mention the whole preset history in a small footnote below. If someone has been smart enough to use the --presets, he/she will probably know a bit of the correspondence to -V already. New users, OTOH, are likely to be very confused about all this "--preset fast medium equals -V4 --vbr-new stuff". Just my opinion.


--------------------
Proverb for Paranoids: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
-T. Pynchon (Gravity's Rainbow)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 13:15
Post #92





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (user @ Sep 27 2005, 01:03 PM)
And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place.

Can you please provide a link, as I have no wish to waste people's time.

I get the distinct impression that it hasn't really been concluded though... if key players like guruboolez are still unconvinced, and dev0 is open for discussion.

Edit: For the record I have no interest in taking part in deciding the recommended setting(s) - I have neither the hearing or the background knowledge. I am keen to see a sensible decision to be reached though, preferably by those who do have those qualities.

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Sep 27 2005, 13:21


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sTisTi
post Sep 27 2005, 13:17
Post #93





Group: Members
Posts: 385
Joined: 25-June 04
Member No.: 14895



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Sep 27 2005, 04:04 AM)
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Sep 27 2005, 01:00 PM)
I suggest to not automatically recommend -V2 because it simply correspond to the old --standard preset. If the "quick start" really have to recommend a transparent setting (i don't really agree with it), it might be -V3 or -V1, or even -V4.

OK, thank you.

It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.

Tricky.
*


I don't think a vote is of much use. Maybe one way to present it is as some kind of curve with diminishing returns; i.e. above a certain level, you don't gain much (if any) perceived transparency by using more and more bits. The slope of this curve is different for each listener, but there is usually a point where the trade-off between more bits and more quality is ideal for a certain listener with certain demands (e.g. "transparency" => probably V2/V3 or "for portable use" => probably V4/V5).
It should be pointed out that everybody has to find this ideal point for himself, as general recommendations are impossible for diverse listeners and habits.

This post has been edited by sTisTi: Sep 27 2005, 13:23


--------------------
Proverb for Paranoids: "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
-T. Pynchon (Gravity's Rainbow)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Sep 27 2005, 13:19
Post #94





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



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Sep 27 2005, 01:04 PM)
It seems to me the best person in the position to make that suggestion is you - or perhaps a vote.

The trouble with a vote is you get idiots like me voting, who think -V5 is overkill.
*

It's precisely why I wouldn't recommand any setting supposed to be transparent and efficient at the same time. -V2 correspond to 180-200 kbps, and it's overkill for many people. As overkill as -V0. -V5 or even -V6 could be as pertinent, but it wouldn't satisfy critical listeners. And extreme listeners wouldn't be 100% pleased with -V2.

Voting wouldn't solve the problem.
Best I'd say is to give the corresponding bitrate of each -V setting, and let people choose their preset based on bitrate or on their own experience.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 27 2005, 13:22
Post #95





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



Agreed.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Sep 27 2005, 13:25
Post #96


LAME developer


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



What about something like:

VBR settings provide different quality levels, adapted to different configurations/needs.
A few examples:
V5 seems to be appropriate on portable devices used in a nomadic way.
V4 seems to be appropriate is you pay a moderate/medium attention to the music.
V2 will likely be transparent to standard people.
V0 will give you the highest VBR quality, but is a bit extreme regarding bitrate/file size.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post Sep 27 2005, 13:36
Post #97





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



I don't think that not giving any recommendation at all is a good idea.
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

Users want to be taken at hand and told what to use. When they have specific needs, they'll try to inform themselves and choose something which fits their need, but there are still a lot of people, who just want to convert their CDs to MP3s without thinking so much about details like which setting accomodates to their hearing.

QUOTE
I get the distinct impression that it hasn't really been concluded though... if key players like guruboolez are still unconvinced, and dev0 is open for discussion.

It certainly isn't. My proposal was just a result of really liking benc's suggestions and spicing it up a bit. I perceive user's proposal as too cluttered and disorganized.

QUOTE
And yes, now it seems, there is a need to reinvent the wheel again. These discussions, what should be recommended, have already taken place.

I don't know what you are talking about. Just because there are other options considered and other matters discussed (please point me to the post where -V 2 as the recommendation was discussen and I'll take that back).

I like Gabriel's idea as an addition to the "Quick Start" recommendation.


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Sep 27 2005, 14:01
Post #98





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



QUOTE (dev0 @ Sep 27 2005, 01:36 PM)
I don't think that not giving any recommendation at all is a good idea.
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

It will depend of his hearing and of his own need. The storage capacity of his player could make the decision. I won't recommend -V2 to someone having a 128/256 MB player.
Problem with recommendation is: we are giving a universal answer to people having very different needs. In other words, we're answering to a question without listening to the question. Most often, the recommendation won't be really suited. And -V2 is probably not the best thing nowadays. Such encodings are filling too quickly hardware players (even HD based players).
-V2? For what? Transparency? People really looking for transparency are using lossless nowadays. And probably most people using MP3 are looking for something most efficient that the alt-preset elephant/standard.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Sep 27 2005, 14:03
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gabriel
post Sep 27 2005, 14:03
Post #99


LAME developer


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



QUOTE
Think of it like this: What would you tell a (clueless) friend to use when teaching him how to encode MP3s.

To clueless people, I'd recommand -V4
To people paying attention to the quality I'd recommand -V2
To nitpicking people I'd recommand -V0

In all cases I would not mention vbr-new, as an extra switch would already be too much, risking that new users would get even more confused.

THE question is: whom are you giving recommendations to?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Sep 27 2005, 14:05
Post #100





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



For all those reasons we have the complete table of -Vx settings,
to emphasize -V2 as 1 good solution (which of course does not fit to everybodys needs), we have -V2 --vbr-new as example in the case-Eac tutorial with the remark that it can be replaced.
and to tell people about the targets of -V2, -V4 etc., we have the remarks section, now the important switches coloured, -V2 green, -V4 yellow, -V5 orange.
Gabriels wording is of course somewhat shorter than the previous, suggested by Mooze (sorry for shortening your long complicated nick wink.gif , I hope we know, whom I mean).

about --vbr-new:
Then i would already recommend, to let the standard -V x away, so that we have only the -V x --vbr-new settings in the table.

This post has been edited by user: Sep 27 2005, 14:09


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

11 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
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: 3rd September 2014 - 05:00