IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Closed TopicStart new topic
EAC VBR V0 or CBR 320 for the best outputted Lame MP3, the same question thats probably been asked 10000 times before?
extent
post Oct 30 2010, 23:12
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 20-November 08
Member No.: 62761



OK. This is the same question thats probably been asked 10000+ times! unsure.gif I have one compact disc, and with its first audio track:
1 - recorded it to the latest Lame MP3, using EAC: to joint stereo, using the highest VBR quality setting (v 0, set at 320kbps max)
2 - recorded it to the latest Lame MP3, using EAC: to joint stereo, using the highest CBR quality setting (v 0, ie constant 320kbps)
Both are recorded in EAC to MP3 at what I assume to be the mp3 standard of 44.1 khz in frequency.

There are so many discussions on which is best in audio quality, if size and compatibility arent an issue (if MP3 was the only choice of format, but with size and player compatibility not being a problem to look into. There are far too many audio websites and users in forums out there saying the opposite to one another on what is really 'true' regarding the best mp3 quality, but not many are comparing the VBR and CBR lame outputted files using the same program with identical options. Now, assuming I had great headphones, and amazing ears (!) to notice a real difference (assuming I can hear well above the human ear frequency range) for my results with the tests above, which would be the MP3 method to pick? Some say the VBR option for the above EAC/Lame test would have an ever so slightly better audio quality level than the second test with CBR, with the VBR sounding cleaner/clearer, AND save space to boot, as VBR is capable of giving a wider frequency range in its output? Is this true?

Slightly different subject-I have also 'heard' (ahem) that the highest quality levels in lame/EAC can sometimes be an issue in itself, comparing to lower lame quality additional settings of V 1,2,3 etc) often giving better results with some audio tracks-could this be an eac or lame bug??)- but ignoring all this, and going back to my original test ..... which is the eac option to use? thanks for any info blink.gif

This post has been edited by extent: Oct 30 2010, 23:26
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Oct 30 2010, 23:24
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=16295

QUOTE (extent @ Oct 30 2010, 15:12) *
great headphones

Assuming the frequency response is at least as high as your hearing, it could very easily be that better headphones will make it more difficult to distinguish lossy from lossless. The reason being is that mp3 encoders assume a flat response at playback. Deviation from a flat response can unmask artifacts.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tpijag
post Oct 30 2010, 23:24
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 2337
Joined: 19-May 08
Member No.: 53637



If I could see through walls, which sunglasses would be best on a sunny day.

How does this differ from
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....c=72285&hl=

terry
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Oct 30 2010, 23:26
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Hmm...

Discussion closed. Please read TOS #6 if you have any questions.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th April 2014 - 20:44