IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
LAME VBR CBR Confusion
whootz0r3d
post Nov 17 2012, 14:48
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 17-November 12
Member No.: 104589



Been reading this article about LAME http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME but I'm still confused about wheather VBR V0 / CBR 320 which one is better than the other? Some paragraphs in that article seem to contradict one another..

Without getting into too much details which one IS technically the superior and why in plain english?

This post has been edited by whootz0r3d: Nov 17 2012, 14:49
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
[JAZ]
post Nov 17 2012, 15:45
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 1783
Joined: 24-June 02
From: Catalunya(Spain)
Member No.: 2383



The more you look into a definitive answer on that, the more you'll be reducing the answer to fewer cases.

The simple answer is that they try to do the same, while V0 is able to reduce the bitrate requirements.

In LAME 3.99, the internal tunings where changed so that V0 is stronger, and there is also halb97's modified lame, which pushes this further.

On the other hand, CBR in Lame 3.99 is also different to what it was in, for example, Lame 3.96. It was seen that applying the VBR algorithm with a fixed bitrate improved on some samples.

As such, there are many differences between versions on what "V0" is and what CBR320 is. The consequence of this is my initial sentence. You can't get a definitive answer so it all ends up on if you want or don't want the benefits of VBR, or if you still have a (rare) player that works worse with VBR files.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
soundping
post Nov 17 2012, 16:58
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 3-February 12
Member No.: 96900



My preferred MP3 setting: VBR -V0 -q 0

VBR has an advantage of adjusting to the finer elements of sound. Music with string instrument sounds for example.

CBR will not adjust and the finer elements could be lost or distort.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dynamic
post Nov 17 2012, 17:24
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 821
Joined: 17-September 06
Member No.: 35307



I think the consensus at such bitrates is that problem samples are very rare for either mode and are usually fairly subtle and not too unmusical in nature.

halb27's modified lame in -V0+ mode fixes a certain group of fairly rare problem samples (particularly short block tonal samples) and improves a few more without making them completely transparent. It tries to reserve as much bit reservoir as possible to allow momentary bitrates to greatly exceed 320kbps (e.g. 480kbps or so) for key frames in many of these samples, where a constant 320kbps bitrate approach might not reserve as much bit reservoir.

I'd be tempted to recommend -V0+ in halb27's modified lame as about as robust as you'll get with MP3 at the moment if you don't care about file size, though there may be future tunings that improve it further, especially given internal psymodel improvements in lame 3.100 alpha2. Proving or falsifying that when problem samples are so rare, however, is next to impossible.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
nastea
post Nov 18 2012, 04:08
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 30-July 12
Member No.: 101867



QUOTE (soundping @ Nov 17 2012, 17:58) *
My preferred MP3 setting: VBR -V0 -q 0


As far as I know the -q 0 option will not make any difference since -V0 already uses the highest quality algorithm.
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 September 2014 - 09:43