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: Some unusual results in lame 3.99.5 (Read 17718 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Some unusual results in lame 3.99.5

Reply #25 –
Quote from: ThomasG3rd on
... Im not sure if the following statement is true but if the bitrate is larger, wouldnt the file size also be larger?? ...

With several posts I explained to you that the audio data are packaged into frames. Frames are the containers for the audio data. Frames come with fixed sizes corresonding to bitrates of 320, 256, 224, ... kbps. When encoding a track N frames are created. Whenever a bitrate is displayed to you (correctly - not always the case), it's the average frame bitrate of these N frames.
Average frame bitrate corresponds with file size.
Average frame bitrate however is not exactly what you're interested in. You're interested in average audio data bitrate. But you'll never get an information about audio data bitrate. Audio data bitrate is hidden to you.

Things aren't real bad though. The way most users use Lame, audio data are packaged efficiently into frames. Thus audio data bitrate is (nearly) identical with frame bitrate.
There are few exceptions:
a) when doing the nonsense of turning bitreservoir off (I've demonstrated to you that this blows up frame bitrate, that is file size, because of totally unused bits)
b) by requiring Lame to use a very high minimum (frame) bitrate (same mechanism as when turning bitreservoir off)
c) maybe by using some other option the user doesn't understand (though none such comes to my mind at the moment).
d) by using CBR 320. Audio data bitrate of Lame CBR320 files vary from track to track. On average it's more like 305 kbps, not 320 kbps.
lame3995o -Q1.7 --lowpass 17

Some unusual results in lame 3.99.5

Reply #26 –
Quote from: ThomasG3rd on
I have been doing some sound sighted testing, not ABX testing
Fixed this for you.  The point of ABX testing is to ensure you are in fact only testing what you hear.