Any listening test Stereo vs Joint stereo in mp3? |
Any listening test Stereo vs Joint stereo in mp3? |
Jan 14 2005, 14:46
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 92 Joined: 9-July 04 Member No.: 15216 |
Hi all,
in many discussions I read about mp3 via Lame encoder the result is that the best solution is joint stereo. I believe in that as the developers who I highly esteem say so. But is this statement supported also by more independent listening tests? Especially I would be interested in comparison between --preset standard (joint stereo) and dtto with stereo mode. Can the result in general depend also on the Lame version? From the tests I could read usually still the old good Lame 3.90.3 comes out as the winner. Cheers, Crazyman |
|
|
|
![]() |
Jan 17 2005, 16:34
Post
#2
|
|
![]() ReplayGain developer Group: Developer Posts: 4583 Joined: 5-November 01 From: Yorkshire, UK Member No.: 409 |
The stereo to joint stereo (i.e. L+R>M+S) transform is lossless and perfectly reversible. However, the channels are then lossily coded.
If you force an encoder to (a) stay in L+R mode (i.e. "discrete" or "true" stereo), and then (b) force it into a bitrate area where it will add audible distortion, the stereo image will be preserved but you'll have audible quantisation noise. If anything, the addition of poorly-correlated noise to both channels may make the stereo sound stage sound wider - artificially and quite nastily of course. The centre image could be damaged. If you force an encoder to (a) stay in M+S mode (i.e. one of the options available in "joint" stereo), and then (b) force it into a bitrate area where it will add audible distortion, the stereo image will start to collapse and you may have audible quantisation noise, but it will be less obvious. The point of VBR is to use as many bits are as necessary for a transparent result, and the point of joint stereo is to give the option of encoding M+S (or L+R!). You're only going to hear a difference between discrete and joint stereo if something goes wrong. Which it rarely does with lame 3.90.3 aps. What's more, of all the thousands of tracks that must have been encoded with aps, and the handful of tracks which are not transparent, no one has suggested that any of these are improved by forcing discrete stereo. I'd encourage people to look at that thread... http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=12004 ...to see that forcing stereo may not be the answer - even when using a DPL or DPLII decoder. Was this issue ever resolved? Cheers, David. This post has been edited by 2Bdecided: Jan 17 2005, 16:38 |
|
|
|
crazyman Any listening test Stereo vs Joint stereo in mp3? Jan 14 2005, 14:46
beto This makes no sense, since joint stereo is just a ... Jan 14 2005, 14:51
mithrandir QUOTE (beto @ Jan 14 2005, 08:51 AM)This make... Jan 14 2005, 16:38
Otto42 QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 09:38 AM)No,... Jan 14 2005, 16:50
dev0 QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 04:38 PM)No,... Jan 14 2005, 18:42
Mark7 QUOTE (dev0 @ Jan 14 2005, 09:42 AM)QUOTE (mi... Jan 14 2005, 19:04
mithrandir QUOTE (dev0 @ Jan 14 2005, 12:42 PM)QUOTE (mi... Jan 14 2005, 22:44
Jojo QUOTE (mithrandir @ Jan 14 2005, 01:44 PM)If ... Jan 15 2005, 01:49
Busemann QUOTE (Jojo @ Jan 14 2005, 04:49 PM)QUOTE (mi... Jan 15 2005, 01:55
Jojo QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 14 2005, 04:55 PM)QUOTE... Jan 15 2005, 02:03
SirGrey >>No, joint stereo is lossy.
Wrong.
joint-st... Jan 14 2005, 16:48
SirGrey Addenium:
Lots of the confusion goes from Fhg.
The... Jan 14 2005, 16:53
Gray_Wolf This is incredible
Many people in present mome... Jan 14 2005, 17:10
crazyman QUOTE (Gray_Wolf @ Jan 14 2005, 08:10 AM)This... Jan 19 2005, 09:30
Busemann QUOTE (crazyman @ Jan 19 2005, 12:30 AM)Quite... Jan 19 2005, 11:44
crazyman QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 19 2005, 02:44 AM)QUOTE... Jan 20 2005, 11:29
Jojo The bottom line is that Joint-Stereo used in LAME ... Jan 14 2005, 17:53
crazyman QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Jan 17 2005, 07:34 AM)The ... Jan 19 2005, 09:25
mithrandir QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Jan 17 2005, 10:34 AM)The ... Jan 20 2005, 05:52
MugFunky guh, why has this myth never been dispelled?
it s... Jan 20 2005, 06:29
DreamTactix291 QUOTE (MugFunky @ Jan 19 2005, 11:29 PM)guh, ... Jan 20 2005, 06:56
Gabriel The M/S stereo transform itself is lossless.
Howev... Jan 20 2005, 09:13
2Bdecided Talk about things coming back to bite you...
I... Jan 21 2005, 12:10
Gabriel Well, in your case intensity stereo is a good thin... Jan 21 2005, 13:55
Bogalvator QUOTE (Gabriel @ Jan 21 2005, 04:55 AM)Well, ... Jan 22 2005, 04:49
2Bdecided QUOTE (Gabriel @ Jan 21 2005, 12:55 PM)Well, ... Jan 24 2005, 17:00
Gabriel QUOTE but the broadcasters have reportedly asked f... Jan 24 2005, 20:41
Ossie Hi, I just want to check if the following staement... May 21 2005, 10:57
Pio2001 It all depends if the psychoacoustic model can han... May 21 2005, 13:01
Pio2001 Oh, that's not all, you'll have to force m... May 21 2005, 13:07
mjkng2 hey
this is an old article against Joint Stereo: ... Aug 4 2006, 19:20
Garf QUOTE (mjkng2 @ Aug 4 2006, 20:20) hey
t... Aug 5 2006, 09:44
stephanV It's not against JS... it just says that an al... Aug 4 2006, 20:16
Pio2001 I've performed two joint stereo listening test... Aug 4 2006, 22:52
haregoo This sample is ABXable(16/16) even with -V 0 becau... Aug 5 2006, 03:57
Gabriel QUOTE (haregoo @ Aug 5 2006, 04:57) This ... Aug 5 2006, 08:48
haregoo QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 5 2006, 16:48) Regar... Aug 5 2006, 14:14![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th May 2013 - 11:03 |