EAC using lame, command line options for mp3 Options

[norlane]

Looking for the best command line option for trancoding a CD to mp3.
Using EAC under compression / external compression.
What is the best command line to add for best quality mp3 results
using lame as the codec.

Using EAC V 1.0 beta 3.
the guide sais it is out of date for the latest release.
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_and_Lame

I beleive this is the changes.
"%s" is now "%source%"
"%d" is now "%dest%"
"%a" is now "%artist%"

so what command line structure is best for best quality.

thankx in advance.

This post has been edited by norlane: Aug 24 2012, 05:25

[db1989]

Using EAC V 1.0 beta 3.
the guide sais it is out of date for the latest release.
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_and_Lame

I beleive this is the changes.
"%s" is now "%source%"
"%d" is now "%dest%"
"%a" is now "%artist%"

Those and more. See here: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...AC_placeholders

so what command line structure is best for best quality.

With a perceptual audio format, there is not really any such thing as “best quality”. There are transparent and ‘not transparent’. Determining how to achieve the former is a question for the individual’s ears only.

That said, we tend to recommend starting around -V2 and then progressively trying lower settings until you start to notice a difference, on material representative of your normal listening.

[norlane]

Would like to adjust this line so it will work to start with EAC using LAME codec.
Then will try the others later and compare. So i just need to reset the EAC placeholders
for the newest version. would this be right.
-b 320 -h --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%artist%" --tt "%title%" --tg "%genre%" --tl "%albumtitle%" --ty "%year% " --tn "%tracknr%" %source% %dest%

c) For 320 CBR rips:
-b 320 -h --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tg "%m" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d


Additional Command Line Options:

Select, then copy one of these lines (depending on which preset you are creating a profile for), and paste into the box in EAC:

a) For V0 rips:
-V 0 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tg "%m" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

b) For V2 rips:
-V 2 --vbr-new --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tg "%m" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

c) For 320 CBR rips:
-b 320 -h --add-id3v2 --ignore-tag-errors --ta "%a" --tt "%t" --tg "%m" --tl "%g" --ty "%y" --tn "%n" %s %d

This post has been edited by norlane: Aug 24 2012, 09:13

[greynol]

Why the cumbersome command lines when EAC can add tags for you?

Also, depending on what version of Lame you're using, vbr-new is either redundant or might use a different algorithm than you expect. It seems you've derived your command line from a moldy source of information.

This post has been edited by greynol: Aug 24 2012, 17:32

[trout]

What is the best command line to add for best quality mp3 results using lame as the codec

Best advice from wiki articles LAME and EAC and LAME :

Let EAC create tags (Recommended)

To have EAC tag your files, tick Add ID3 tag; and in the Additional command line options box, copy and paste the following string:

-V0 %source% %dest%

[norlane]

This was the tutorial i got the command line from
http://blowfish.be/eac/Lossy/lossy.html#no2

Using Lame Product Version 3.99 release 5
File Version 3.99.2.5
from here
http://www.free-codecs.com/Lame_Encoder_download.htm

Question: Some tutorials recommend not using EAC to Add ID3 tag option in the Additional command line options.
The say to direct LAME by starting these options in the command line, question is
why would they state this .

Question: So in the latest vesion of LAME Variable Bitrate is the best option starting around -V2 Yes

Thankx for the advice enjoyong using EAC great app and almost past the nOOb stage

This post has been edited by norlane: Aug 24 2012, 21:53

[greynol]

Some tutorials recommend not using EAC to Add ID3 tag option in the Additional command line options.
The say to direct LAME by starting these options in the command line, question is
why would they state this .

I would expect them to give you a reason or some way to contact them to ask the question. I would certainly not take if on faith.

There are quite a few myths about EAC and I have no reason to believe this isn't one of them. Just about anyone can write a tutorial. Most are copied and pasted from other tutorials by people who clearly don't understand the material they're presenting.

[exec]

What about ID3v2.4.0 tags? Does the corresponding option work correctly in the latest EAC version?
When this tutorial page was initially written, there was a bug that when this option was enabled, no tags were written at all...

This post has been edited by exec: Aug 27 2012, 08:45

[greynol]

Could you be a little more specific? Which version of EAC and how exactly was this tested?

Was Lame writing 2.4 tags at the time or are we comparing apples to oranges?

[exec]

OK, version was V0.99 prebeta 4. I tested it for myself, because I wrote the initial wiki article.
Afaik LAME could write 2.4 tags at this time...

[greynol]

I will check 0.99pb4 and a couple other versions for myself later. I'm not just going to take your word for it, I hope you understand.

Re: "AFAIK"
Not good enough.

[exec]

I will check 0.99pb4 and a couple other versions for myself later. I'm not just going to take your word for it, I hope you understand.

Sure. At the moment I cant't check it for myself, sorry.
If 0.99pb4 or later versions can write 2.4 tags, it may be a good idea to update the wiki article. Or have 2.4 tags have any disadvantages over 2.3 tags (aside from compatibility with older DAPs)?

Offtoptic: can dBpoweramp write 2.4 tags with the latest mp3 plugin?

Re: "AFAIK"
Not good enough.

This post has been edited by exec: Aug 28 2012, 17:47

[greynol]

I just tested V0.99pb3 and V0.99pb4 and can say with absolute 100% certainty that both were capable of successfully writing ID3V2.4 tags.

I also want to know if lame can write 2.4 tags from the command line. Everything I've ever seen on the matter suggests that it cannot; at least not through 3.98.4.

Or have 2.4 tags have any disadvantages over 2.3 tags (aside from compatibility with older DAPs)?

I have had difficulty with 2.4 tags while writing command-line scripts for obvious reasons.

While I have yet to have a need for 2.4 tags, I am not an opponent of them.

This post has been edited by greynol: Aug 28 2012, 22:11

[greynol]

If 0.99pb4 or later versions can write 2.4 tags, it may be a good idea to update the wiki article.

Done.