IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Mp3 VBR Question, High Frequency Extension
Donunus
post Oct 18 2005, 17:58
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



How does vbr work in the cutting off of higher frequencies? Dont the different cbr bitrates cut off at different frequencies: ex 112 cutting off at around 14k while 320 cutting off data at around 20khz. Does vbr high frequency variably cut off when the bitrates fluctuate? Doesn't that theoretically change the character of the sound within one song?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Leo 69
post Oct 18 2005, 18:00
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 16-May 04
From: UK - Russia
Member No.: 14117



The lowpass is constant and is set according to VBR quality.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Oct 18 2005, 21:12
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



I made an updated version of the v. 3.95 table that can be found here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=18091.

LAME 3.97 beta 1
CODE
Switch Equals Target Lowpass Resample

-V 0 --preset extreme 210-270 19500
-V 0 --vbr-new --preset fast extreme 210-270 19500
-V 1 200-250 19000
-V 1 --vbr-new 200-250 19000
-V 2 --preset standard 170-230 18600
-V 2 --vbr-new --preset fast standard 170-230 18600
-V 3 140-210 18000
-V 3 --vbr-new 140-210 18000
-V 4 --preset medium 130-190 17500
-V 4 --vbr-new --preset fast medium 130-190 17500
-V 5 110-170 16000
-V 5 --vbr-new 110-170 16000
-V 6 100-150 15600
-V 6 --vbr-new 100-150 15600
-V 7 90-130 14900 32000
-V 7 --vbr-new 90-130 14900 32000
-V 8 70-110 12500 32000
-V 8 --vbr-new 70-110 12500 32000
-V 9 50-80 10000 24000
-V 9 --vbr-new 50-80 10000 24000

I used Encspot for checking the lowpass and resample values. The bitrate values are from my test here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=328558

Edit: typo

This post has been edited by Alex B: Oct 18 2005, 21:36


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donunus
post Oct 19 2005, 11:17
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



thanks for the info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Oct 28 2005, 06:59
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (Alex B @ Oct 18 2005, 04:12 PM)
I made an updated version of the v. 3.95 table that can be found here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=18091.

LAME 3.97 beta 1
CODE
Switch  Equals  Target Lowpass Resample

-V 0  --preset extreme 210-270 19500
-V 0 --vbr-new --preset fast extreme 210-270 19500
-V 1    200-250 19000
-V 1 --vbr-new    200-250 19000
-V 2  --preset standard 170-230 18600
-V 2 --vbr-new --preset fast standard 170-230 18600
-V 3    140-210 18000
-V 3 --vbr-new    140-210 18000
-V 4  --preset medium  130-190 17500
-V 4 --vbr-new --preset fast medium 130-190 17500
-V 5    110-170 16000
-V 5 --vbr-new    110-170 16000
-V 6    100-150 15600
-V 6 --vbr-new    100-150 15600
-V 7    90-130 14900 32000
-V 7 --vbr-new    90-130 14900 32000
-V 8    70-110 12500 32000
-V 8 --vbr-new    70-110 12500 32000
-V 9    50-80 10000 24000
-V 9 --vbr-new    50-80 10000 24000

I used Encspot for checking the lowpass and resample values. The bitrate values are from my test here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=328558

Edit: typo
*

The --vbr-new and non --vbr-new versions appear to be identical (for a given -V n). huh.gif


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Oct 28 2005, 07:54
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 4718
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (Donunus @ Oct 18 2005, 09:58 AM)
How does vbr work in the cutting off of higher frequencies? Dont the different cbr bitrates cut off at different frequencies: ex 112 cutting off at around 14k while 320 cutting off data at around 20khz. Does vbr high frequency variably cut off when the bitrates fluctuate? Doesn't that theoretically change the character of the sound within one song?
*


Lowpass is fixed according to preset and/or switches. In theory you can set a 64kbps file to have a 22kHz lowpass if you really want. In practice, its best to just trust the developers on this one and not tweak the encoder.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Oct 28 2005, 08:20
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 08:59 AM)
The --vbr-new and non --vbr-new versions appear to be identical (for a given -V n).  huh.gif
*

Yes, the lowpass values written in the LAME tags are identical. In my test the bitrates were near, but not exactly the same. Because I rounded the resulting median values to the nearest ten no differences show up in the table.


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Oct 29 2005, 04:17
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (Alex B @ Oct 28 2005, 03:20 AM)
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 08:59 AM)
The --vbr-new and non --vbr-new versions appear to be identical (for a given -V n).  huh.gif
*

Yes, the lowpass values written in the LAME tags are identical. In my test the bitrates were near, but not exactly the same. Because I rounded the resulting median values to the nearest ten no differences show up in the table.
*


Thanks for the reply. It sounds like it's a "you say 6, I say half a dozen" kind of difference. In other words, there is no real difference. When I ran "lame --preset help" for my LAME 3.96.1, the text said:

"fast" - Enables the new fast VBR for a particular profile. The disadvantage to the speed switch is that often times the bitrate will be slightly higher than with the normal mode and quality may be slightly lower also.

So if "fast" uses vbr-new, then it's not worth using vbr-new. Maybe the word "new" in the above description is confusing me with the "new" in "vbr-new". huh.gif


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kotrtim
post Oct 29 2005, 04:30
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 657
Joined: 4-December 02
Member No.: 3989



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 07:17 PM)
So if "fast" uses vbr-new, then it's not worth using vbr-new.  Maybe the word "new" in the above description is confusing me with the "new" in "vbr-new". huh.gif


Yes, its worth it! up to 1.5X faster than "OLD"
and the bitrate is not always bigger....if its bigger, it won't be more than 10kbps, sometimes it's lesser (didn't test properly)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Oct 29 2005, 04:44
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (kotrtim @ Oct 28 2005, 11:30 PM)
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 07:17 PM)

So if "fast" uses vbr-new, then it's not worth using vbr-new.  Maybe the word "new" in the above description is confusing me with the "new" in "vbr-new". huh.gif


Yes, its worth it! up to 1.5X faster than "OLD"
and the bitrate is not always bigger....if its bigger, it won't be more than 10kbps, sometimes it's lesser (didn't test properly)
*


Yes, but what scared me is when LAME said, "quality may be slightly lower also", in reference to the "fast" option (vbr-new). ohmy.gif


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DreamTactix291
post Oct 29 2005, 05:11
Post #11





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 552
Joined: 9-June 04
From: A place long since forgotten...
Member No.: 14572



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 10:44 PM)
Yes, but what scared me is when LAME said, "quality may be slightly lower also", in reference to the "fast" option (vbr-new).  ohmy.gif
*
I don't believe the "quality may be slightly lower also" holds true for --vbr-new any longer with regards to 3.97b. I believe that was originally said for the 3.90 branch in relation to --alt-preset fast standard and --alt-preset fast extreme and was a somewhat general consensus for a long time. guruboolez's test here though tend to favour --vbr-new over --vbr-old nowadays though.

This post has been edited by DreamTactix291: Oct 29 2005, 05:12


--------------------
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Oct 29 2005, 06:25
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (DreamTactix291 @ Oct 29 2005, 12:11 AM)
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 28 2005, 10:44 PM)
Yes, but what scared me is when LAME said, "quality may be slightly lower also", in reference to the "fast" option (vbr-new).  ohmy.gif
*
I don't believe the "quality may be slightly lower also" holds true for --vbr-new any longer with regards to 3.97b. I believe that was originally said for the 3.90 branch in relation to --alt-preset fast standard and --alt-preset fast extreme and was a somewhat general consensus for a long time. guruboolez's test here though tend to favour --vbr-new over --vbr-old nowadays though.
*


Hmm, I see. I wonder how applicable it would be for my LAME (3.96.1). I guess vbr-new would be almost as fast as cbr, in terms of encoding time.


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DreamTactix291
post Oct 29 2005, 06:39
Post #13





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 552
Joined: 9-June 04
From: A place long since forgotten...
Member No.: 14572



I believe as of 3.97b the speed rankings are as follows.

--vbr-new is faster than CBR which is faster than ABR which is faster than --vbr-old.

I remember reading that posted by someone here, but I don't ever really encode CBR or ABR files to test it to be honest.


--------------------
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
audiomars
post Jun 21 2006, 12:09
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 135
Joined: 16-September 05
From: India
Member No.: 24505



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 29 2005, 10:55) *
Hmm, I see. I wonder how applicable it would be for my LAME (3.96.1). I guess vbr-new would be almost as fast as cbr, in terms of encoding time.


Any specific reason as to why you are using Lame 3.96.1? Lame 3.97b2 is the recommended version as per HA. The speed increase using --vbr new is worth it smile.gif


--------------------
Reason is immortal, all else mortal
- Pythagoras
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
InnocenceMyth
post Jun 21 2006, 15:01
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 48
Joined: 12-May 03
From: Miami Beach, FL
Member No.: 6572



QUOTE (audiomars @ Jun 21 2006, 03:09) *
QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 29 2005, 10:55) *

Hmm, I see. I wonder how applicable it would be for my LAME (3.96.1). I guess vbr-new would be almost as fast as cbr, in terms of encoding time.


Any specific reason as to why you are using Lame 3.96.1? Lame 3.97b2 is the recommended version as per HA. The speed increase using --vbr new is worth it smile.gif



Given that beowulf7's post is over 8 months old, he might have moved up to 3.97b2 by now.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
beowulf7
post Jun 22 2006, 05:49
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 22-October 05
From: TX
Member No.: 25291



QUOTE (InnocenceMyth @ Jun 21 2006, 10:01) *
QUOTE (audiomars @ Jun 21 2006, 03:09) *

QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Oct 29 2005, 10:55) *

Hmm, I see. I wonder how applicable it would be for my LAME (3.96.1). I guess vbr-new would be almost as fast as cbr, in terms of encoding time.


Any specific reason as to why you are using Lame 3.96.1? Lame 3.97b2 is the recommended version as per HA. The speed increase using --vbr new is worth it smile.gif



Given that beowulf7's post is over 8 months old, he might have moved up to 3.97b2 by now.

LOL ... good call. Yes, I upgraded to LAME 3.97b2 a few months ago. cool.gif


--------------------
DJ Prince: http://djprince.beowulf7.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
audiomars
post Jun 27 2006, 11:09
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 135
Joined: 16-September 05
From: India
Member No.: 24505



QUOTE (beowulf7 @ Jun 22 2006, 10:19) *
LOL ... good call. Yes, I upgraded to LAME 3.97b2 a few months ago. cool.gif


Meh... I didn't notice the date of your earlier message crying.gif


--------------------
Reason is immortal, all else mortal
- Pythagoras
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: 19th April 2014 - 16:00