IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Disadvantages of using LAME MP3 Encoder Option in EAC
Andrew jones
post Sep 19 2007, 00:24
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 27-July 07
Member No.: 45669



Hi,

I have read in a number of posts (and the wiki) that the "best" encoding option to use with EAC is "User Defined Encoder". I have ripped ca 400 CDs using "LAME MP3 Encoder", with command line options of "-V 0 --vbr-new" and bitrate set to 256 Kbs (which I thought would be ignored). The LAME version is 3.97.

What are the issues of doing it this way, rather than with "user defined encoder" and the extra command line parameters?

Andrew
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jebus
post Sep 19 2007, 00:33
Post #2





Group: Developer
Posts: 1319
Joined: 17-March 03
From: Calgary, AB
Member No.: 5541



QUOTE (Andrew jones @ Sep 18 2007, 17:24) *
Hi,

I have read in a number of posts (and the wiki) that the "best" encoding option to use with EAC is "User Defined Encoder". I have ripped ca 400 CDs using "LAME MP3 Encoder", with command line options of "-V 0 --vbr-new" and bitrate set to 256 Kbs (which I thought would be ignored). The LAME version is 3.97.

What are the issues of doing it this way, rather than with "user defined encoder" and the extra command line parameters?

Andrew




it won't ignore the 256 kb/s option... EAC is creating its own command-line, adding your typed in options, and then sending the whole thing through to lame.



Setting it to "user defined" means that it won't try to pass options from the gui controls, because its like saying "who the hell knows what this encoder's parameter scheme is". Make sense? I'm not sure exactly what the effect on your files was, though... depends on what lame was receiving from eac, and which options override which.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
david_dl
post Sep 19 2007, 01:32
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 604
Joined: 17-December 05
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 26461



I think it would be preventing the VBR bitrate from ever going below 256; kinda defeats the purpose of VBR, even with V0 the bitrate may often be lower than 256.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Sep 19 2007, 01:49
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10241
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



It will also invoke either -h or -f depending on whether high or low quality was selected.

Yeah, you need to select "User Defined Encoder" in order to have complete control over what gets passed along to Lame.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shadowking
post Sep 19 2007, 01:55
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1527
Joined: 31-January 04
Member No.: 11664



Best to first check a few tracks when using any tool before doing the whole thing.


--------------------
Wavpack -b450s0.7
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Andrew jones
post Sep 19 2007, 11:45
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 27-July 07
Member No.: 45669



QUOTE (david_dl @ Sep 19 2007, 01:32) *
I think it would be preventing the VBR bitrate from ever going below 256; kinda defeats the purpose of VBR, even with V0 the bitrate may often be lower than 256.


Thanks - this makes sense and in hind-sight fits with what I saw. I will try a few more rips using the wiki guidance this time blush.gif and see what difference it makes to file sizes.

QUOTE (shadowking @ Sep 19 2007, 01:55) *
Best to first check a few tracks when using any tool before doing the whole thing.


Did that and they seemed OK. It's only more recently that I realised I wasn't using the recommended options and wondered what the practical effect of that might be!

Edit: just ripped 3 albums using the recommended setting. These were the percentages comparing "new" size, with "old" size:
White Stripes, Elephant, 88%
Yes, Relayer, 96%
Arcade Fire, Funeral, 93%

If this selection is typical (mean 92%), then I would free up nearly a Gb on my Vibez, which would be nice to have, but not a compelling reason to re-rip them all immediately.

This post has been edited by Andrew jones: Sep 19 2007, 13:07
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Sep 19 2007, 13:36
Post #7





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



I have just linked to this thread from the wiki, for anyone else who may ask the question when reading the wiki guide.

To clarify the responses so far:

If you use Lame MP3 Encoder EAC will mix your command-line settings with those it will create from the GUI settings.

The Bit rate dropdown - if any value other than 128kbps is selected - will be used to set the -b (minimum bitrate) switch.

The High/Low Quality radio buttons will add -h and -f respectively.

Therefore, if you select Lame MP3 Encoder, select 256kbps from the Bit rate dropdown, have High Quality checked, and have "-V2 %s" as your command line EAC will actually run:

CODE
-b 256 -h -V2 %s


Using User Defined Encoder means that you know exactly what EAC is running.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
psycho
post Sep 19 2007, 14:30
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 14-October 05
Member No.: 25099



All these problems made me decide to use lame dll with EAC. The dll, which uses .ini
No problems since. No worries, I know exactly what I get. wink.gif

EDIT: Typo.

This post has been edited by psycho: Sep 19 2007, 14:32


--------------------
lame -V 0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 20th November 2014 - 22:41