IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!


- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.


- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.


- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
Which LAME VBR settings do you use?, Poll regarding LAME VBR preferences
LAME VBR Preferences
What VBR setting do you use?
-V0 (.XXX) (--[alt-]preset [fast] extreme) [ 125 ] ** [28.28%]
-V1 (.XXX) [ 17 ] ** [3.85%]
-V2 (.XXX) (--[alt-]preset [fast] standard) [ 171 ] ** [38.69%]
-V3 (.XXX) [ 43 ] ** [9.73%]
-V4 (.XXX) (--[alt-]preset [fast] medium) [ 23 ] ** [5.20%]
-V5 (.XXX) [ 52 ] ** [11.76%]
-V6 (.XXX) [ 7 ] ** [1.58%]
-V7 (.XXX) [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
-V8 (.XXX) or -V9 (.XXX) [ 1 ] ** [0.23%]
Other [ 3 ] ** [0.68%]
What LAME version do you use?
3.98 (.2) [ 385 ] ** [87.10%]
3.97 [ 39 ] ** [8.82%]
3.90.3 [ 12 ] ** [2.71%]
Other [ 6 ] ** [1.36%]
If using 3.98, do you use floating point values?
Yes [ 57 ] ** [12.90%]
No [ 333 ] ** [75.34%]
I don't use 3.98 [ 52 ] ** [11.76%]
Total Votes: 603
  
quackalist
post Nov 7 2008, 01:58
Post #51





Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 18-July 03
Member No.: 7846



Voted V0, 3.98, not that I imagine it betters V2 which I used to use other then rarely but storage isn't at a premium now so I allow a large 'comfort zone' just because.

Fact is, I have a lot of FLAC's on my HD too, and if I have any temporary storage issues I recode a lot to V0 while I ponder another HD smile.gif

This post has been edited by quackalist: Nov 7 2008, 02:05
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kitsuned
post Nov 14 2008, 12:48
Post #52





Group: Members
Posts: 103
Joined: 18-July 08
From: New York
Member No.: 55969



My two cents buys a vote for:

Lame 3.98
-V3 setting (great for portables given gbs of space)
no floating points (never saw the need)


--------------------
foobar 0.9.6.8
FLAC -5
LAME 3.98 -V3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ajfoucault
post Dec 4 2008, 05:29
Post #53





Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 19-May 07
Member No.: 43582



3.98.2
V0
Real me do this!
JK~! laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
antman
post Dec 5 2008, 03:10
Post #54





Group: Members
Posts: 103
Joined: 3-January 07
From: Texas
Member No.: 39241



Lame 3.98.2/V5.7
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
somemightsay
post Dec 5 2008, 03:38
Post #55





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 26-March 05
Member No.: 20967



3.98.2

-V0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xSerpentx
post Dec 13 2008, 02:44
Post #56





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 5-March 07
Member No.: 41190



V4
LAME 3.98

I'm actually re-ripping. I want to save space and I noticed from reading here so much that my current files (V0) is way overkill and I will mostly be listening to these V4 mp3's on my iPhone or iPod classic.

Before you guys say anything...I'm really not interested in lossless.


--------------------
EAC | LAME3.98 -V4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Frankie
post Apr 3 2009, 18:43
Post #57





Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 14-June 03
Member No.: 7175



Mostly V4 for use with my iAudio F2. Up to V0 for other purposes.
3.98.2
Floating point? Never used it. But still I think it's a good thing that we are given the choice to use it.....
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rick.hughes
post Apr 3 2009, 19:30
Post #58





Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 16-February 07
Member No.: 40679



I play my FLAC archive on my home stereo, and only use mp3 on my portable. Since it only has 12GB and is primarily used in the car I use -V6 by default. If I ever notice any problem I will just encode that one song again rather than use more space than needed on all the others.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
trout
post Apr 3 2009, 19:46
Post #59





Group: Members
Posts: 424
Joined: 26-March 09
Member No.: 68400



-V 1.337

ph34r.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skope
post May 9 2009, 22:04
Post #60





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 9-May 09
From: Stockholm
Member No.: 69643



Hey everyone! I stick to using 3.90.3modified --alt-preset standard. It's slow and probably outpeformed qualitywise, still it feels solid to me. It's like a tank. cool.gif

EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention that I play my mp3's in my iPod Classic 80GB with KOSS Porta Pro's. I encode mainly hip-hop music which usually gives me pretty good file sizes on the V2 (standard) setting. At home I play the CD's in my stereo.

This post has been edited by skope: May 9 2009, 22:22
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PaJaRo
post May 10 2009, 19:13
Post #61





Group: Members
Posts: 101
Joined: 12-June 08
Member No.: 54275



When I transcode from a lossy source (I know it is not a good practice, but I do it for portability to my DAP) I usually use -V 4.
When I transcode from a lossless source, again to listening the music in a DAP, I use -V 3.
I mostly use flac on my computer (since hard disk space is not a problem).

I'm using lame 3.98.2 I've never used floating point, but it could be a good idea.

This post has been edited by PaJaRo: May 10 2009, 19:15
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pike84
post May 12 2009, 09:39
Post #62





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 7590



What is the practical significance of using floating point values in this case? I tried searching, but there seems to be very little information on the subject huh.gif.

This post has been edited by Pike84: May 12 2009, 09:40
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post May 12 2009, 11:26
Post #63





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



IMO the advantage of non-integer -V values is with listening tests. You can adjust quality setting to achieve an average bitrate which gives a fair comparison with the contenders.
So Lame 3.98 -V5.7 was used with last fall's 128 kbps mp3 test. I used -V1.5 (--lowpass 16.7) for a fair comparison with dBpoweramp's FhG encoder @ CBR 192 in a private listening test. (As I was content with the results I sticked with -V1.5 though difference in quality and bitrate towards -V2 or -V1 is expected to be negligible).

This post has been edited by halb27: May 12 2009, 11:30


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pike84
post May 13 2009, 09:03
Post #64





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 7590



So, it's just about being able to use decimal numbers, in addition to integers? It's not like decimals couldn't be used with fixed-point values?

This post has been edited by Pike84: May 13 2009, 09:04


--------------------
XMPlay rocks! www.un4seen.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post May 13 2009, 11:21
Post #65





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



QUOTE (Pike84 @ May 13 2009, 09:03) *
So, it's just about being able to use decimal numbers, in addition to integers? It's not like decimals couldn't be used with fixed-point values?

I don't know if I understand you correctly. If it's about the number of digits after the decimal point: it's possible to use more than 1 digit though I can't imagine anybody has the need for it.


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pike84
post May 13 2009, 15:29
Post #66





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 7590



Well, I'm not sure if I understand this floating point stuff very well myself, and I guess computers using binaries has something to do with it...

Anyway, what I meant was that is it necessary to use floating point values to be able to use any non-integer value for the quality setting of LAME? I guess I'm being a bit lazy for not wanting to read a lot about the floating point implementations with computers and LAME here, but I was hoping that someone could dumb it down for me smile.gif.


--------------------
XMPlay rocks! www.un4seen.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post May 13 2009, 15:35
Post #67





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



It's not about implementation, just about the -V value given on the command line.

Guess it wasn't a good idea refering to 'floating point' values at all. In our context of -V value 'floating point value' should read 'non-integer value'.

This post has been edited by halb27: May 13 2009, 15:35


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pike84
post May 13 2009, 16:24
Post #68





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 6-July 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 7590



Oh, ok. I thought it had some deeper meaning behind it, but I guess not smile.gif.


--------------------
XMPlay rocks! www.un4seen.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ZinCh
post May 17 2009, 20:40
Post #69





Group: Members
Posts: 171
Joined: 28-September 06
Member No.: 35705



Sometimes I am using floating point to get target size.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gasmann
post May 18 2009, 19:36
Post #70





Group: Members
Posts: 112
Joined: 18-August 05
Member No.: 23986



It looks like I'm stuck with LAME 3.98.2 -V 5 for my portable. Maybe I could go even lower (I've never tried) because -V 5 is generally transparent for me. I'm using MP3 only for my old portable having 256 MB. But it is of high quality (hell, it was expensive!) and I'm fine with 4 hours of music, that's enough for me (apart from that it's not very practical to have a lot of music on it because it has no folder navigation, you have to skip through all songs to find what you want).

This post has been edited by gasmann: May 18 2009, 19:39


--------------------
flac 1.2.1 -8 (archive) | aoTuVb5.7 -q 4 (pc, s1mp3)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
d_headshot
post May 20 2009, 03:44
Post #71





Group: Members
Posts: 195
Joined: 28-September 08
Member No.: 58729



What are floating point values?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
WonderSlug
post May 20 2009, 04:42
Post #72





Group: Members
Posts: 299
Joined: 6-February 08
From: San Diego, CA
Member No.: 51066



QUOTE (d_headshot @ May 19 2009, 19:44) *
What are floating point values?


Numbers with decimal values


Integers --> 1, 2, 3, 128, 1353698 and so on


Floating Point --> 1.6, 12.1, 313.453, 895.3237952

This post has been edited by WonderSlug: May 20 2009, 04:42
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lock67ca
post Jun 21 2009, 13:49
Post #73





Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 24-June 05
Member No.: 22928



Most of my collection is ripped with 3.97b at vbr new but I've been using 3.98 at -v2 since it was released. I may try using -v5, since I'd like to get more stuff crammed onto my portables with as little quality loss as possible.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GeneV
post Jul 3 2009, 14:36
Post #74





Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 3-July 09
Member No.: 71173



I went through a couple of test with a few pop/rock songs, comparing ABR 160 and 192 vs. VBR at similar bitrates.
I made ABX-Tests and the outcome is that ABR clearly sounds better.
It should be mentioned that I always use the -q 0 switch, which increases encoding time but seems to deliver significantly better quality.

I also compared different ABR bitrates. The optimum seems to be 192. I found that 224 or more do not produce audible improvements,
while 160 is only slightly less in qualitiy and 128 a tolerable value, if size matters at least as much as quality.

So my default encoding options are: --abr 192 -q 0

Peace
Gene
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
halb27
post Jul 3 2009, 18:53
Post #75





Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 9-October 05
From: Dormagen, Germany
Member No.: 25015



QUOTE (GeneV @ Jul 3 2009, 15:36) *
... I made ABX-Tests and the outcome is that ABR clearly sounds better. ...

Do you use 3.98?
I've been an ABR advocate for a long time before 3.98 came out (maybe I still am at very high bitrate ABR 250...300, but it's not very relevant to me any more).
With 3.98 however I can hardly imagine samples where ABR is clearly better than VBR in your bitrate range though ABR certainly is fine too.


--------------------
lame3100m -V1 --insane-factor 0.75
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
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: 17th September 2014 - 07:04