IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Moving entire FLAC collection to MPC, Will I have any regrets?
robert
post Sep 15 2007, 17:18
Post #26


LAME developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 789
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 5



I'm just curious: the bad 320kbps mp3s, what LAME version and command line switches did you use? What's wrong with the mp3s? Could you name some tracks where this happens?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smok3
post Sep 15 2007, 17:54
Post #27


A/V Moderator


Group: Moderator
Posts: 1747
Joined: 30-April 02
From: Slovenia
Member No.: 1922



to original poster: yes you will regret it, i have a big part of my library only encoded into mpc (iam way to lazy to rerip) and the non-compatibility-portability is annoying.


--------------------
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 15 2007, 18:18
Post #28





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



@robert

look at this thread: I also ABXed that track easily.
Setting - recommended (3.97final -b 320)

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....c=57462&hl=

This post has been edited by Bourne: Sep 15 2007, 18:37
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
batagy
post Sep 15 2007, 21:34
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 105
Joined: 26-October 04
Member No.: 17847



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 17:32) *
some of you think i am trashing the FLACs... no... i just don't have anything to play them...

For portable, ss above already recommended, Cowon players are amazing to play FLAC. I have a Cowon iAudio X5L, it's just excellent to play flac files directly. My version has 30 GB hard drive, but I think 60 GB one also exists.
For table standalone player, there's SqueezeBox or Roku Soundbridge for playing FLAC from a NAS.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 15 2007, 21:50
Post #30





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



I might order Ziova...
290 USD + 200 USD import tax + 900 USD shipping tax
LOL

From all info collected I may just ignore any MP3 artifact and do just like shadowking suggested, oh hey it's an artifact but it sounds damn good... and stick with -V2 --vbr-new - it's the universal HOMESTEREO/CAR/PORTABLE/PC solution.

It's interesting to see how people take this whole thing into a very passionate level about their favourite format.
Let Blue-Ray/HD-DVD/DTS Lossless/FLAC Studio Master 24/48 downloads come!

Well... I wonder why didn't anyone created LosslessMP3 (since we have lossyFLAC).

This post has been edited by Bourne: Sep 15 2007, 22:15
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kanak
post Sep 15 2007, 22:26
Post #31





Group: Members
Posts: 1190
Joined: 12-January 06
From: Cambridge, MA
Member No.: 27052



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 16:50) *
Well... I wonder why didn't anyone created LosslessMP3 (since we have lossyFLAC).


Seriously, did you even take a look at Wavpack Hybrid or OptimFrog Dualstream?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 15 2007, 22:33
Post #32





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



QUOTE
Seriously, did you even take a look at Wavpack Hybrid or OptimFrog Dualstream?


seriously yes... i took a look at it... but ain't able to play anywhere...

I have said this BS kinda thing mainly because "hardware compatibility" - the creation of a lossless format that is backwards compatible with mp3 players. doesn't even need to compress that much than FLAC -5. A few megs would be just fine.

DVD-Players decode mp3 to PCM, but won't decode ISO->WAV->PCM (not LPCM here please!)
If a DVD techincally decodes an mp3 to PCM, it might just because it found a "mp3-header".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
batagy
post Sep 15 2007, 22:41
Post #33





Group: Members
Posts: 105
Joined: 26-October 04
Member No.: 17847



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 23:33) *
DVD-Players decode mp3 to PCM, but won't decode ISO->WAV->PCM (not LPCM here please!)
If a DVD techincally decodes an mp3 to PCM, it might just because it found a "mp3-header".

If WAV size is enough for you, and you would like to use DVD-R discs, then why don't you just create DVD-Audio discs? DVD-Audio supports to play 44.1 kHz audio.

http://dvd-audio.sourceforge.net/
GUI:
http://home.comcast.net/~adobeman/DVDAGUI/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 15 2007, 22:45
Post #34





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



batagy,

Isn't DVD-A incompatible with DVD-V only devices?
Isn't most DVD+/-R medium incompatible with DVD-A format?
I never seen a DVD-A enabled DVD for purchase.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kanak
post Sep 15 2007, 22:47
Post #35





Group: Members
Posts: 1190
Joined: 12-January 06
From: Cambridge, MA
Member No.: 27052



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 17:33) *
QUOTE
Seriously, did you even take a look at Wavpack Hybrid or OptimFrog Dualstream?


seriously yes... i took a look at it... but ain't able to play anywhere...


Well you said:

QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 14 2007, 13:31) *
I know that MPC has got not much hardware support (if any) but let's suppose I buy a RockBox supported iPod, then it's a start isn't it?


Rockbox supports Wavpack lossy... so you can have lossy in your ipod and lossless in your computer (or lossy there too).

The advantage of wv lossy over mpc is that if you dump the corrections to a dvdr, you can get the 'lossless' versions of your files without reripping all audio cds.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
batagy
post Sep 15 2007, 22:57
Post #36





Group: Members
Posts: 105
Joined: 26-October 04
Member No.: 17847



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 23:45) *
batagy,

Isn't DVD-A incompatible with DVD-V only devices?
Isn't most DVD+/-R medium incompatible with DVD-A format?
I never seen a DVD-A enabled DVD for purchase.


1. DVD-A is incompatible with DVD-V only devices, but nowadays you can get cheap DVD players which does support DVD-Audio. For example Samsung DVD-P355 (older), Pioneer DV-600AV (new), some Panasonic players etc. There are many DVD players which support DVD-Audio.
2. All DVD+R and DVD-R is compatible with DVD-Audio, that means, you can burn yourself a DVD-Audio compliant disc to a very normal simple DVD disc. Nothing special medium required.
3. Because it doesn't need any special disc.

I burnt DVD-Audio discs, and it's playing without problem with my Panasonis DVD-RA82, Pioneer DV-585A, and Samsung DVD-P355. Now these mentioned players are discontinued, but there are newer ones.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluewer than blu...
post Sep 16 2007, 03:10
Post #37





Group: Members
Posts: 182
Joined: 6-March 02
Member No.: 1450



I really don't understand why you have decided to open this thread, when it's more than clear that you had already made up your mind and no one is gonna change that, regardless of what they claim or suggest.

You want to go with MPC, even though it is well known that lacks any decent hardware support? Go ahead then. Just bear in mind that it takes more than a normal ear to distinguish artifacts in 320Kbps mp3s. Considering though that the music is gonna be played through a typical iPod, I wouldn't mind the existence of a few artifacts, when I go down a noisy road. It's not like I'm looking for perfection in such conditions.

Since you are not satisfied with eveyone's propositions, do it your own way and accept the pros and cons.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 16 2007, 03:48
Post #38





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



some people are just blunt! either lane they take...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bluewer than blu...
post Sep 16 2007, 14:04
Post #39





Group: Members
Posts: 182
Joined: 6-March 02
Member No.: 1450



I'm just stating the obvious. Since you have found reasons to argue in everyone's suggestions, you don't prefer lossless and heard artifacts to any other lossy format other than mpc, take the road with that as you had decided in the first place.

Do you really think that you leave much to argue about? I don't think so...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
12345
post Sep 17 2007, 08:53
Post #40





Group: Members
Posts: 205
Joined: 4-May 02
Member No.: 1959



Go ahead and do it. I hope you wont feel the same regret as I do. I have about 300 CDs in Musepack insane. Musepack feels more and more like an abandoned format every day that passes. I wish I had done LAME --alt-preset standard (or FLAC like I do now, but that wasn't an option at the time).

Seriously, I'm sure you managed to ABX some trouble samples with -b 320 MP3s, but will you really care about it during casual listening? You don't state that you used the the latest LAME encoder for the MP3s you ABX. Did you?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 17 2007, 19:10
Post #41





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



more people worring about this! LOL
man, nevermind...
and no, I just won't be going lossy...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nawhead
post Sep 18 2007, 09:04
Post #42





Group: Members
Posts: 60
Joined: 7-July 02
From: Atlanta, USA
Member No.: 2507



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 14 2007, 14:02) *
you guys don't get it...
lossless is two much... at least for now

every lossy codec has its pros and cons.
the only contrary about MPC is hardware support, which I remember saying "buying a well-known rockbox supported ipod".
but guess what I can even connect the laptop to the stereo...
I don't see myself using Vorbis/AAC/MP3 anymore (too many issues)


I'm sort of in the same kind of situation but I'm switching from MPC to Vorbis. I switched to MPC years ago after being a LAME --alt-present standard (V2) user for years. After ABX'ing between V2 LAME (and even 320 CBR LAME) versus MPC Standard, I knew I had to change codecs. I tried Vorbis back then too (when the aoTuV branch was in the budding stages), but ABX'ing told me Vorbis at high bitrates wasn't good enough yet against MPC Standard. So I was content for years using just Standard and Xtreme MPC. I don't do the portable thing and I don't trade files, so it was just for home use, and MPC fit that bill perfectly.

But recently, I tried Vorbis again, and let me tell you, it's come a long way. The tuning that's been happening to aoTuV is amazing. I find with MPC, it reaches 99% to CD quality at q7 (~225kbps). Well after a week of testing with Vorbis aoTuv Beta 5, I find it reaches 99% to lossless at q6 (~192kbps). That's amazing. And it's 2nd only to AAC at all the low bitrates (I never use low bitrates, but I was amazed how good 64kbps (q0) vorbis file sounds). And the Lancer optimized builds of Vorbis aoTuv Beta 5 is even more amazing. I can encode an entire album in 2 minutes. That's crazy talk even by MPC's speed standards.

And I really didn't care before, but because Vorbis is open-source, there's a lot of development on it (in comparison to MPC), and I gotta agree with all the people that say MPC is going the way of other obsolete formats. Ever try to edit an MPC file? Better dig up the original CD! So since it doesn't hold the highest lossy quality medal anymore and 3rd party development is almost nonexistent, there's really no more reason for me to use it. It was cool while it lasted, but I'm moving on to Vorbis.

What problems are there against Vorbis that you don't like? Maybe you can clue me in. unsure.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 18 2007, 10:21
Post #43





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10338
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Unless you're you're annoyed with the ability to hear particular artifacts on a handful of your encoded tracks, you'll never regret choosing to stick with a stable and universally accepted format.

For formats that are not and likely will never be as prevalent, you're basically going to limit your choices when it comes to playback options.

Sorry mpc fans (and vorbis, but to a lesser extent), but my money is on mpeg when it comes to bitrates that are intended to deliver transparency.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Sep 18 2007, 17:08
Post #44





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



Well for me OGG and MPC are in the "same position"..

This is a reply from a MPC web admin for those bashing MPC to death:

QUOTE
To anyone who asks if Musepack is still being developed, I have several points to present:

1. Have you missed the last 4 encoder releases (3 from last year, 1 from 2004), which fix some quite important issues?

2. Have you missed the continuous updates to libmpcdec, the portable Musepack decoder library which has enabled Musepack support in various applications on various platforms?

3. Musepack's sound quality/psychoacoutics related code is very advanced and therefore very few people can handle it. The former main developer is busy with other (not audio codec related, but frightningly advanced and demanding) projects.
The situation is not much different with other modern audio and video codecs. Pretty much all open source codec projects, including us, are in need of capable developers.

4. Personally, I've grown tired of comparisons related to "who has the most development?" The most obvious example is Musepack VS Vorbis. Most people may not even know that the last quality related developments Vorbis has had occured in 2001-2002 (excluding unsupported 3rd party modifications, or hacks). Monty, the main developer, hasn't published anything in that field since then. The focus has been on cleaning up code, fixing bugs, improving speed, etc. There is constant development, and exactly the same applies to Musepack. Code cleanups, bug fixes, optimization, only the last quality related optimizations occured in 2003. But that doesn't stop people from spreading ridiculous statements of "lack of development" or the "death" of the project, which hasn't been more alive in years.

5. We know several people (not only Klemm or Buschmann) who are capable of furthering SV7.5 development, but unfortunately everyone we know is busy with another project that takes pretty much all of his time. We've said on various occasions that we'd appreciate any assistance we could get regarding the development of the bitstream, which is the foremost thing on our to-do list.

To summarize: The "format," as in, the bitstream, hasn't had changes. Changes are planned but more developers are needed. The encoder will keep being updated as it has been 3 times last year whenever we find an issue. The decoder library is constantly under development and that is a main reason you can see Musepack being supported pretty much anywhere nowadays, be it by Rockbox on iRiver or iPod portable players, TCPMP on mobile phones, numerous players on Windows and Linux/UNIX/BSD systems, and other platforms.


Source text at: http://forum.musepack.net/showthread.php?t=265

I think he's got a point on the matter OGG vs. MPC. OGG (and LAME) development is already stressed to death, and there is also the fact that NOT MANY people are tweaking. The original OGG developer hasn't published anything since 2001-2002, where OGG development was really a locomotive. Even HA.org wiki states how limited OGG development is, stating as "Limited Official Development". Oh Well that would be the same thing for MPC right?

Personally I still believe MPC is superior on the high-bitrate ground, compared to Vorbis. You see people in the forum saying that they stick to "-q7" or even "-q8" - but well that's just saying the same as LAME 320kbps.

About hardware support, Vorbis has got a lot more support yes... but it is also frigging limited. Think internationally. Don't limit people's access to US market only. There are NOT many OGG players out there, in particular no DVD-Player I know of can play a single OGG file. But they all can play MP3.

So I don't think there are many advantages going OGG.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shadowking
post Sep 18 2007, 18:10
Post #45





Group: Members
Posts: 1529
Joined: 31-January 04
Member No.: 11664



I don't think they are in the same position. There is much better vorbis awareness - lots of rippers, frontends, players have native vorbis support. Not many support mpc. Vorbis has always been an alternative for techheads, a standard in unix os etc while mpc use was pretty much restricted to HA users or some ripping scene.


--------------------
Wavpack -b450s0.7
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CiTay
post Sep 18 2007, 19:08
Post #46


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 2378
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 3



QUOTE (shadowking @ Sep 18 2007, 19:10) *
I don't think they are in the same position.


They never were. Musepack is the only "MP3-rival" that isn't backed by a commercial or professional organization. For something that started as a one-man project - and concerning the psychoacoustics, was essentially tuned by two capable persons in total, with the help of volunteering listeners - it has come remarkably far. I mean, when even the MP3-inventors can't convince that many people to use the official successor format, you unfortunately have to admit that these other alternatives will probably stay in a niche, be it bigger or smaller.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GeSomeone
post Sep 24 2007, 21:31
Post #47





Group: Members
Posts: 922
Joined: 22-October 01
From: the Netherlands
Member No.: 335



QUOTE (shadowking @ Sep 18 2007, 18:10) *
There is much better vorbis awareness

I think the reason is that vorbis scales better to low bit rates.
When at a certain point Klemm wanted to optimize the low bit rates of Musepack, there was almost zero interest from the users. The Musepack "fans" (including myself) were using at least -q 5. So being looked at as a "high bit rate only" codec (even if that wasn't the whole truth) made Musepack even more a niche.

All that beside, mp3 at 320 is silly to me, the VBR modes of LAME have a much better size/quality ratio.
Musepack has good quality for the bitrate, if size matters that much and you just want to use your audio the way you use it now, why not go Musepack? The caveats are already mentioned.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
v4audio
post Dec 31 2007, 14:52
Post #48





Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 6-November 04
Member No.: 18004



as long as you have the mpc dvd-r safely locked up in a drawer why would you regret it? basically your question is about the best non-mp3 portable lossy format, and not archival since you have that taken care of, right?

the new ipod classic have yet to be rockbox'd (last I checked), so it may be worth your while to abx some aacs to see if they are acceptable to you as a portable format.

i love my mpc's to death, but i'm starting to think that the artifacts may not be as apparent precisely because they are not used as much so that my ears are not as accustomed to hearing the artifacts.

This post has been edited by v4audio: Dec 31 2007, 14:54
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
12345
post Mar 27 2008, 10:22
Post #49





Group: Members
Posts: 205
Joined: 4-May 02
Member No.: 1959



I encoded my entire music collection to MPC back in 2002, which I regret. It's still in Musepack but since then I've moved to OS X and the compatibility for the the format is not good. Cog/Play handles it but does not like APEv2 tags.

Today I've got a more relaxed attitude. LAME v3.97 -V 2 and ID3v2.3 is a good choice, although–like you–I've ripped to FLAC so I don't have to transcode when MP3 is no longer the best choice for a lossy portable format. -V 2 might not be 100% transparent on all test samples. But hey, if that bothers you while you are _really listening_ to music you've probably got other issues to deal with than audio compression. smile.gif
QUOTE (v4audio @ Dec 31 2007, 15:52) *
the new ipod classic have yet to be rockbox'd.
And it most likely never will be. Visit the #rockbox channel and they'll explain to you that most likely none of the newer iPod models will be supported by Rockbox.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
~*McoreD*~
post Mar 27 2008, 10:35
Post #50





Group: Members
Posts: 568
Joined: 10-July 03
From: Australia
Member No.: 7693



QUOTE (Bourne @ Sep 15 2007, 03:02) *
you guys don't get it...
lossless is two much... at least for now

every lossy codec has its pros and cons.
the only contrary about MPC is hardware support, which I remember saying "buying a well-known rockbox supported ipod".
but guess what I can even connect the laptop to the stereo...
I don't see myself using Vorbis/AAC/MP3 anymore (too many issues)


I would recommend keeping them. Making MPC copies is fine.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
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 - 15:28