Encoding albums in different VBR settings, I have been encoding albums in different VBR settings- is this bad? Options

[Rontox]

I have been encoding my albums in different VBR settings. I usually encode my favourite songs in V0 VBR, and the rest of the album tracks in V1 or V2 VBR. Does this make a difference- as I cannot hear a difference at all between these songs and the original CD/WAV/FLAC. Should I continue doing this, or encodethe whole album in one VBR quality setting throughout?

All help appreciated.

[jimhaddon]

Just use the search!

This post has been edited by jimhaddon: Apr 18 2009, 13:43

[onkl]

No, not bad.

[JensRex]

I'm not sure what you're asking. You can encode your files however you like. You can use ABX to find out which -V setting is transparent to you, and maybe go a little above that for some headroom.

[kornchild2002]

This isn't bad per say but you could be wasting bits. For example, you can fail ABX tests comparing your lossless files to -V 2 encoded mp3s. This means that your ears have no need for anything higher, -V 2 will sound transparent. So you won't really be benefiting from the -V 1 or -V 0 encoded tracks. You can do what you want with your lossy music but I am too OCD about things. I like having all of my ripped music at one lossy setting with one lossy encoder (Nero AAC at -q0.50). I conducted a slew of blind ABX tests with my favorite tracks as well as some songs I wasn't too familiar with. For the most part, I didn't pass my tests. I know that -q0.50 can provide transparent results whether I am listening to my absolute favorite track or a song coming off of a CD I just purchased.

[pdq]

I don't see a problem with what you are doing, but I would take it one step further. Encode your favorite tracks in high bitrate vbr, and the rest in a vbr setting that has some audible but not objectionable artifacts, such as -V4 or -V5. This will save a lot of space for the less important tracks.

[probedb]

It only becomes a problem when you decide you like another track a lot more than you used to

[Rontox]

It only becomes a problem when you decide you like another track a lot more than you used to

That won't be a problem anyway, since my less-favourite tracks are transparent at V1/V2 anyways, and since I never encode any lower, that won't be a problem.

[probedb]

That won't be a problem anyway, since my less-favourite tracks are transparent at V1/V2 anyways, and since I never encode any lower, that won't be a problem.

You may as well do them all at that setting if it's transparent Unless you really can hear the difference.

[Rontox]

That won't be a problem anyway, since my less-favourite tracks are transparent at V1/V2 anyways, and since I never encode any lower, that won't be a problem.

You may as well do them all at that setting if it's transparent Unless you really can hear the difference.

Yeah. I've decided to re-encode ( ) all of my albums into one quality setting, for consistency. Most are in V0, some are in V1, a few are in V2. Since all of those settings are transparent (to my ears) from the original CD/FLAV/WAV then I'll be fine. I was considering encoding everything at V2 since it's transparent anyway, but because I'm a quality freak, I decided to use V0 .

Another question though- I have a few of my most cherished albums in 320kbps still. I re-encoded them into V0- I couldn't hear a difference. Should I use the V0 or 320kbps?

[Mark7]

It all doesn't matter. -V2 and -V0 are both really good quality. As long as you don't reencode mp3 to mp3 everything is fine. So for your last question, keep the 320kbps mp3s.

The only good option would be mp3repacker. This program will convert your 320kbps into VBR mp3 without any quality loss!

[Rontox]

It all doesn't matter. -V2 and -V0 are both really good quality. As long as you don't reencode mp3 to mp3 everything is fine. So for your last question, keep the 320kbps mp3s.

The only good option would be mp3repacker. This program will convert your 320kbps into VBR mp3 without any quality loss!

Thanks. However, shouldn't I pick the V0 mp3s, because I can't hear the difference and it has smaller file size. BTW- I'm encoding from FLAC to WAV to MP3. For some reason my MP3 player ges ape-sh*t whenever, I encode directly from FLAC to MP3

[probedb]

Thanks. However, shouldn't I pick the V0 mp3s, because I can't hear the difference and it has smaller file size. BTW- I'm encoding from FLAC to WAV to MP3. For some reason my MP3 player ges ape-sh*t whenever, I encode directly from FLAC to MP3

I believe every encoder will decode the FLAC->PCM then encode from there anyways so sounds like a problem in your encoding process rather that your MP3 player. You could even check the files produced as they should be identical I think? Or maybe it's something to do with the tags...just guessing here

[kornchild2002]

There is no need to go from FLAC to PCM WAV and then to mp3. foobar2000, dBpowerAMP, and many other programs can automate this process. I am not sure if the Lame.exe file can accept flac file input but I do know that there are programs that offer an automatic process. mp3 files are mp3 files regardless of their source. I am not sure if you are using foobar2000 or not but, by default, it uses ID3v2.4 which might be the issue.

About going with -V 0 or 320kbps files, I would go with the -V 0 ones simply because they are smaller. As I said, you may want to think about going with one standard an sticking to it. That way you don't have to keep worrying about files that you like and having them get the right bitrate setting when compared to files that you don't like. You already said that you can't ABX -V 2 from the original source. This means that it will produce transparent results for all your files regardless of how well you like them. I don't think there is a need to have the songs that you like at a higher bitrate setting since your ears won't be benefiting from it. Might as well go back and encode all your music to one setting. That would stop any confusion on your part and make life a little easier when it comes to ripping and encoding your music.

I am not sure how much space you have but my library (which mainly consists of songs from the metal genre) drastically increases when going from -V 2 to -V 0. I did this test whenever I purchased my 120GB iPod classic thinking that I might be able to carry around -V 0 files with some space to spare. My library jumped from about 95GB to over 120GB when going from -V 2 to -V 0. That was one of my reasons to stick with -q0.5 with Nero AAC since it produces a slightly smaller library size than -V 2 while, to my ears, producing the same quality (and better quality with some problematic samples). So I suggest just going with -V 2 since you would serve no benefit by going all the way up to -V 0.

[timcupery]

I understand the notion of encoding your favorite songs at a slightly higher-quality setting. I've done it before. Yes, I know that ABX results don't differ for favorite songs compared to other songs, but the basic reasoning is to be safe, and safer with songs that you like better.

[WonderSlug]

About a year or so ago, I had quite a bit of different MP3 rips on my music hard drive. Some were rips from about a decade ago that were most 128kbps and 160kbps CBR all the way to the present, going up to -V0 or 320kbps LAME 3.98.2

I've pretty much settled on -V3 for my rips of any new CDs I get, since I determined a while ago that even with LAME 3.97, -V3 was transparent for me for 90+ % of my music. Only for orchestral/symphonic music like classical and some movie soundtracks would I even barely be able to tell the difference and for that type of music I simply bump it up to -V2 which would make them transparent to me.

The only real re-rips and re-encodes I've done have been to replace my older MP3s that were created pre-LAME about a decade ago.

I just replaced almost all my 128kbps to 192kbps CBR MP3s with -V3 rips using LAME 3.98.2

So now, ~90% of my MP3 collection is -V3, ~5% is -V2, and the other ~5% I've kept the original setting because I either no longer own the CD to re-rip, the MP3 was originally downloaded for free online (i.e. from MP3.COM before it was sold), or the CD isn't readable anymore and I can't find a new one online or in a used CD collection for sale.

[DVDdoug]

Another question though- I have a few of my most cherished albums in 320kbps still. I re-encoded them into V0- I couldn't hear a difference.... Thanks. However, shouldn't I pick the V0 mp3s, because I can't hear the difference and it has smaller file size.

Do you care about file size?

If you don't care about file size, then you don't have to compromise... You don't even have to think about it... Just use a high bitrate and don't worry about it. That's what I do. My MP3s are on a computer (not a portable player), and I use V0. If I ever run out of disk space, I'll get a bigger hard drive.

The opposite is true too. If you don't care about quality, you can get small files without worrying about it.

If you want the best quality and the smallest file, you have to do some ABX tests to find the best compromise. And if you can't hear the difference, it really doesn't matter if we're talking about your "most cherished " songs, or songs you don't care about. In the "compromise" you're giving-up something that has zero value!

[Rontox]

I understand the notion of encoding your favorite songs at a slightly higher-quality setting. I've done it before. Yes, I know that ABX results don't differ for favorite songs compared to other songs, but the basic reasoning is to be safe, and safer with songs that you like better.

Exactly. Instead of what I used to do, I've gone for encoding the best albums in V0, and the lesser ones in V2.