IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Explaining Lame Presets, What if someone claims CBR192 is better
Pio2001
post Nov 12 2002, 15:07
Post #1


Moderator


Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3936
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 73



Being new moderator in CD Freaks, I'm facing the usual trolling "FhG 192 CBR is better than Lame, I can hear it".
I always acknowledged that those people had a valid argument :

http://forum.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?s...=&postid=340907

QUOTE
instead of just blindly going off someone elses' opions they read from somewhere else, put those 2 encoders head to head and i bet sound forge is as good if not better. and thats from actual testing on my behalf not just passing some review along

(emphasis is mine)

All we currently do is
-linking to the recommended Lame settings
-tell to RTFF, in other words, search the forums...

...but searching for what ?
The only public blind test between 192 CBR, and Lame settings I can remember of was in r3mix.net, before the --alt-presets were made.
After that, the development was slowly commented on the forums, in threads difficult to find for the newbie, and with very specific infos in each one. I once spent hours making a list of all those threads, but the list is now completely unuseable, since both r3mix.net and HydrogenAudio.org have changed all their URLs in the meantime.

So I asked a sample. But, naturally, asking a sample, I must provide one too, so I linked http://static.hydrogenaudio.org/extra/samp...3-Test_Samples/ and http://www.ff123.net/samples.html

Dibrom, is it OK to link the first directory ? It was originally made for development purposes, and I'm not sure if I can redirect many people there. Also, will it remain online in the future ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
_Shorty
post Nov 12 2002, 17:38
Post #2





Group: Banned
Posts: 694
Joined: 19-April 02
Member No.: 1820



probably best to ask if they've actually done any ABX testing, or if they're just firing up one mp3 and then the other and just convincing themselves that one sounds better without actually comparing either to the original or each other. There is quite a bit of talk here about how FhG actually does sound better than LAME if for some reason you're using 128Kbps, but at anything much higher than that LAME easily takes the cake, especially when talking about --alt-preset standard, etc.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


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: 22nd December 2014 - 16:05