Encoding settings Options

[hero]

dBpoweramp

General
Encoding settings: -V="0" -encoding="SLOW"
Audio
Encoding settings: -m j -V 0 -q 0 -lowpass 19.5 --vbr-new -b 32

-lowpass
Is 19.5 better than 19? Or does it even matter.
I never really understood the "-lowpass"

[lvqcl]

I don't use dBpoweramp, but for latest LAME options -m j -q 0 --vbr-new -b 32 are redundant. So I'd stick to "-V 0" without other options.

[hero]

dBpoweramp, everything is auto.
The only setting you choose is -V 0
Even though it uses "extreme" instead of "fast extreme".

[Mark7]

Is 19.5 better than 19? Or does it even matter.
I never really understood the "-lowpass"

Lowpass cuts off high frequencies. The higher the value the more high frequencies will be kept. Most people can't even hear the high frequencies. And the high frequecies take a lot of bits. So it makes a lot of sense to remove them with a lowpass filter while encoding.

It depends on your ears how many high frequencies you can hear. The older you are the less high frequencies you can hear. I know i can't hear anything above 16khz

EDIT: So for most people 19.5khz is not better than 19khz. Simply because they can't hear these frequencies. And the bits that aren't used for these frequencies, can be used for frequencies that you can actually hear.

This post has been edited by Mark7: May 11 2009, 11:26

[halb27]

I totally agree with Mark7.
I just like to add that in practice using --lowpass 19 or --lowpass 19.5 makes no real difference in whatever aspect. With lowpasses like these I'd stick with the defaults.
In order to save a remarkable amount of bitrate it is necessary to go down to something like --lowpass 17.5. But except for maybe very young people I think --lowpass 16.7 or even --lowpass 16 is quite alright and saves a considerable amount of space.

[shadowking]

I totally agree with Mark7.
I just like to add that in practice using --lowpass 19 or --lowpass 19.5 makes no real difference in whatever aspect. With lowpasses like these I'd stick with the defaults.
In order to save a remarkable amount of bitrate it is necessary to go down to something like --lowpass 17.5. But except for maybe very young people I think --lowpass 16.7 or even --lowpass 16 is quite alright and saves a considerable amount of space.

You have to go down to at least --lowpass 17 to get a good reduction. --lowpass 16 is a monster reduction with some music and practicaly impossible to abx for me so far.

[hero]

What is the "Free Format" option with dBpoweramp? Says it goes up to 640 kbps. Does LAME work well with this option? Or is it something like MP3HD.

[lvqcl]

http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/*checkout*...tml#-freeformat

"many players are unable to deal with it."

[halb27]

Lame offers freeformat that is better precision than what the mp3 standard allows for where frames are restricted to 320 kbps.
Which is the major practical problem for freeformat: your DAP probably won't play it.
Other than that most people won't consider it very useful: mp3 doesn't scale well with frame bitrate that high. When strugging for extremely fine quality you're probably totally content when using -V0 (roughly 240 kbps). In those rare cases where quality isn't perfect the issue is subtle and you can't be even sure whether the problem is fixed when using freeformat. I remember Guruboolez having abxed pre-echo problems even with freeformat. If you want to try to do better than when using -V0 you might try CBR 320 or ABR >= 250. With former versions of Lame it was worth while IMO, with Lame 3.98 for me it isn't.

lvqcl was faster.

This post has been edited by halb27: May 11 2009, 18:37

[Slipstreem]

I think hero would be well advised to carry out some blind listening tests to ascertain a ballpark figure for where he should be heading in terms of bitrate/quality personally. As even LAME in VBR at -V5 is adequate to achieve transparency for many listeners, I'd suggest that he start there and work his way towards -V0 before assuming that he even needs -V0, let alone "Free Format".

Cheers, Slipstreem.

[hero]

The only bad thing about dBpoweramp is that it automatically chooses the command line.
It's usually something like...
-m j -V 0 -q 0 -lowpass 19.5 --vbr-new -b 32
I would rather have -q 2

This post has been edited by hero: May 11 2009, 18:48

[halb27]

You can use dBpoweramp's CLI feature to use Lame just the way you like.

[lvqcl]

If dBpoweramp uses LAME 3.98+ then there's absolutely no difference between "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 0" and "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 2".

[hero]

Lame 3.98.2

This post has been edited by hero: May 11 2009, 19:33

[greynol]

If dBpoweramp uses LAME 3.98+ then there's absolutely no difference between "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 0" and "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 2".

...nor will there be any difference between "-V 0 --vbr-new" and "-V 0".

[hero]

If dBpoweramp uses LAME 3.98+ then there's absolutely no difference between "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 0" and "-V 0 --vbr-new -q 2".

...nor will there be any difference between "-V 0 --vbr-new" and "-V 0".

So if I were making my own command line, it would just be
-m j -V 1 -q 0 -b 32 ?
Something of that nature, without the --vbr-new line.

[greynol]

-V1

Everything else you listed is either redundant or ignored.

This post has been edited by greynol: May 11 2009, 21:03

[hero]

I thought you needed the whole line. So you only need -V ?

[lvqcl]

One note about freeformat: when LAME 3.98.2 encodes to 320 kpbs it applies lowpass filter at 20.5kHz. When it encodes to 600 kpbs freeformat, lowpass value is the same but there is very little content above 18 kHz.

[collector]

-lowpass
Is 19.5 better than 19? Or does it even matter.
I never really understood the "-lowpass"

Whether it's better you should find out yourself. Encode some files with a lowpass of 18 and some with 19 or 19.5 and abx them.
Maybe you can hear differences.

With -qval 0 or -qval 3 I noticed an encoding speed difference. Normally at q3 I get x10/x11, with -q0 I only get x6/x7.
So I encode at V1 with a default -qval=3

[hero]

It's based on the vbr quality.
-V 0 = -lowpass 19.5
-V 1 = -lowpass 19
& so on

[greynol]

Because I was unsure based on some of the posts, I just tested various values with -q in conjunction with -V1.

lvqcl is right:
The values were ignored.

This post has been edited by greynol: May 11 2009, 21:03