Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!

- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.

- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.

- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Now that you found your lowest transparent setting..., Do you choose for fidelity, efficiency, or a compromise?
Suppose that by testing you found that your lowest transparent setting in your favourite lossy codec is quality N. At what setting will you encode your music?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 178
Guests cannot vote 
post Jan 2 2014, 12:56
Post #26

Group: Members
Posts: 107
Joined: 3-March 06
From: this planet
Member No.: 28235

At least for the first question my choice is not listed above.

I use lossless for the music I really love but I use the highest possible MP3 quality or at least 256Kbit AAC for less stellar tracks which I find likable but not likable to store them lossless.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jan 2 2014, 14:31
Post #27

Group: Members
Posts: 399
Joined: 11-March 07
Member No.: 41384

Hmm, you might regret that one day, birdie. Tastes change, I'm going through my library every few years and every time I notice I like some songs I didn't like more and some I liked, a bit less.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jan 2 2014, 14:39
Post #28

Group: Members
Posts: 243
Joined: 21-February 05
Member No.: 20022

I picked these ones:

One step higher quality than N (e.g. -q N+1 for Vorbis, -V N-1 for LAME, etc.), because I want to take a safe margin. After all I didn't check all music in the world.
If I had more storage I would use FLAC but right now I do not so I use very high bitrate Ogg Vorbis (aotuv 6.03) with some extra parameters like impulse_noisetune=-15 among others. I haven't done extensive ABX using standard settings versus using extra parameters but I am happy with the result.

Quality N, just in case I end up spending some time in a quiet place.
In the scenario I use -q 3.5 with impulse_noisetune=-15 which end up around ~135kbps average.

I use the same lossy codec, but at home I use a higher quality setting than for portable
As described above.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jimi Justin
post Feb 9 2014, 23:25
Post #29

Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 22-July 13
Member No.: 109211

I have over 12TB of almost exclusively FLAC. I just dont have the patience for conversion or archiving another format. As a matter of fact if I only have something in super hi res sampling rates that would require dithering it stays home. If someone would come up with a portable foobar interface I would probably have a 2tb drive in my pocket.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 10 2014, 10:47
Post #30

ReplayGain developer

Group: Developer
Posts: 4945
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409

QUOTE (Jimi Justin @ Feb 9 2014, 22:25) *
I have over 12TB of almost exclusively FLAC.
26,000+ CDs / 3+ years of music?

And I thought I had too much.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 10 2014, 11:46
Post #31

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 25-January 07
Member No.: 39990

Lossless (FLAC) for home use, because it's also my backup for all of my CDs. A true backup only makes sense if it's lossless :-)

For mobile use, I've settled on LAME V4, because that's where it achieved transparency for me way back when I ABXed it. I'm sure LAME has improved since then, but V4 isn't hugely storage-heavy compared to V5 or V6, so I just stick with V4.

Then again, sometimes I'm lazy and I just drag the FLAC albums directly to my media player. I've got lots of storage space on it anyway and it saves me the time it would have taken to reencode.

This post has been edited by KozmoNaut: Feb 10 2014, 11:48
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 10 2014, 11:57
Post #32

Group: Members
Posts: 119
Joined: 5-August 08
Member No.: 56722

I rip everything to FLAC, but don't use it for listening, just for archiving. The reason is that my primary listening device is the 160 GB iPod Classic, both at home (in a dock) and portable. So for listening, I have the a selection of my lossless library converted to LAME -V0, which is quite an overkill, but that's what I started with many years ago, and I like the whole library to be consistent. V0 gives me about 18,000 to 20,000 songs on the full iPod, which is more than enough. And even if I used a lower setting I wouldn't be able to fit my whole library into the iPod, so it's not worth the hassle right now. In the future, when there are 256+ GB devices available, I'll probably do a encode of the whole collection to 256 AAC as a definitive listening solution.

This post has been edited by Goratrix: Feb 10 2014, 11:58
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this 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: 19th April 2014 - 15:54