Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: LAME problem samples - discussion (Read 46515 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #50 –
Quote from: halb27 on
Can you do me a final favor and try 3.90.3 --alt-preset 270? I'd like to use that for future productive purposes.

with pleasure 
3.90.3 --alt-preset 270 passed my pre-echo test  (can't abx). Please note that this is just pre-echo test and it might as well fail on other artifacts.
//still like fastenc better 'cause it is 3x faster 


J.M.

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #51 –
Search on scooter.flac gives nothing. Where is sample?

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #52 –
Thanks a lot.
You have helped me a lot with your test on your pre-echo sample.
Sure this doesn't tell about other artifacts. But for the worst problem samples (to me) the problems are negligble to me at a bitrate of 256 kbps and above. As for them I prefered gpsycho a little bit but there has never been an essential difference to me. I just had to make up mind, and decided to use gpsycho.
But your test shows me if I take it all together that the better solution is to use --alt-preset 270.

Out of curiosity I will try fastencc 1.02 and EasyMP3 (if I can get at it) on the bad problem samples I mentioned (though I don't think I will deviate from using Lame). Thank you for the detailed information.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #53 –
Quote from: IgorC on
Search on scooter.flac gives nothing. Where is sample?


here. (last post)

>halb27: glad it helped
EasyMP3 is here. I think the shareware version has some limitations though.

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #54 –
Quote from: jmartis on
EasyMP3 is here. I think the shareware version has some limitations though.

Thanks for the link.
Just tested my standard-bad samples (harp40_1, herding_calls, trumpet) with the Fraunhofer codecs at cbr256. At this bitrate Lame yields a not-at-all-annoying quality (though is not transparent) to me. fastencc102 -br 256000 -hq does so as well. I also tried EasyMp3 but as you said there are restrictions (especially bad for abxing: an intro is added). From just careful listening it sounds the same to me as fastenncc102 (no surprise).

As you are sensitive towards pre-echo maybe fastenc is the better choice for you (AFAIK fastenc is famed for its good pre-echo behavior). I personally stick with lame (but 3.90.3 --alt-preset 270 --lowpass 18.6 from now on).

Thanks again for your help.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #55 –
ABOUT THIS SAMPLE.




ABX log = http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2006.05/_a3_a4.txt
I compared alpha 3 ("revision 3" from 2006.02.05) with alpha 4 - which sound worse (alpha 3 is also far from transparency).

setting used: -b128


EDIT: -V5 --vbr new has no issue like this. alpha 4 jump to 183 kbps whereas alpha 3_3 is only 155 kbps (quality is on first look identical).

LAME problem samples - discussion

Reply #56 –
Quote from: guruboolez on
setting used: -b128


EDIT: -V5 --vbr new has no issue like this. alpha 4 jump to 183 kbps whereas alpha 3_3 is only 155 kbps (quality is on first look identical).

yeah, that's also my experience - only CBR is affected by this artifact. But I still dont get why it happens only sometimes (and quite rarely). (e.g. my looped scooter sample - the exactly same waveform is looped several times but it artifacts only sometimes)

J.M.

edit> quick test; adding -q 5 seems to fix the artifact

edit again> -q 4 is also fine.

When encoded with default quality, there is also a very nasty dropout on the first kick, extending down to 2kHz (!)